Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Shree Ganesh Steel Rolling Mills ... vs Acit Company Circle Vi(2), Chennai on 2 July, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'ए' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI
ी धु वु आर.एल रे डी, याियक सद य एवं ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद य के सम
BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./I.T. A. No.1048/CHNY/ 2 019
( नधारण वष / Ass essm ent Year: 2009-10)
M/s. Shree Ganesh Steel Rolling Vs The ACIT,
Mills Limited, Company Circle - VI(2),
No.14-A, Ennore High Road, Chennai
Thiruvottiyur, Chennai - 600 001.
PAN: AGDPJ0377N
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent)
अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. S. Gayathri, Advocate
यथ क ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
सुनवाई क तार ख/D at e o f h e ar ing : 01.07.2019
घोषणा क तार ख /D at e o f Pr o no un c e m en t : 02.07.2019
आदे श / O R D E R
PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai in ITA No.379/CIT(A)-16/2013-14 dated 04.12.2018 for the assessment year 2009-10.
2. The assessee filed an affidavit seeking condonation of delay of 30 days. It is submitted that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) was misplaced by the assessee's staff and it was found during April with a delay of 30 2 ITA No.1048/Chny/2019 days. Therefore, it was prayed that the delay is not wanton and hence it may be condoned. We heard the rival submissions and condoned the delay in filing the appeal.
3. The Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had genuine reason to file the appeal with 150 days belatedly and the delay was beyond the control of the assessee. The Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that Sarfaesi notice received by the assessee and the financial problems faced by the assessee had affected the assessee in tracing the papers to file the appeal on time. The Ld.AR pleaded that considering the grounds advanced before the Ld.CIT(A) which was due to the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, the delay should have been condoned and the appeal ought to have been decided on merits. Therefore, the assessee pleaded that the appeal may be directed to be decided on merits.
4. Per contra, the Ld.DR opposed the assessee's plea and supported the order of the Ld.CIT(A).
5. We heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material. The assessee submitted as under for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A):-
3 ITA No.1048/Chny/2019
"We were severely impacted by the by the global financial meltdown in late 2008, which affected industries across all spectrum, in one way or the other. To overcome the problems caused by the financial crisis, we had sought a rehabilitation package from our bankers, Union Bank of India, in early February 2009, in line with the Government of India and RBI's guidelines. The policy guidelines on rehabilitation package required expeditious processing of requests for rehabilitation, considering the extra ordinary situation brought by the global financial crisis.
However, despite our best efforts, the rehabilitation package sanctioned by the bank fell far short of what was required to overcome the crisis. Moreover, the sanction came too late, only in end June 20.09 to have a beneficial impact.
Though we tried their best to find ways and means to pay the due to the bank, it became increasingly difficult because of the severe restrictions imposed by the bank in operation the account. The net result was that we could not service the interest and loan repayment obligations to the bank in time, because of which the bank declared our account as an NPA on 30.09.2010 and issued notice under the SARFAESI Act in 09.11.2010 & 13.11.2010 A copy of the SARFAESI notice is enclosed for your ready reference.
The personal properties of the directors of the Company, which were given as collateral security to the bank was also under the SARFAESI scanner and were being called up. A copy of these notices are also enclosed for your ready reference The General Manager (Accounts) and some key staff handling accounts and other portfolios, meanwhile resigned from service in late 2010 since we could not pay them salaries on time. With only skeletal staff left, it was difficult to cull out the required papers and records and/or to trace the required particulars in time for filing the appeal. Moreover, the entire efforts of the management of the Company, was devoted to finding a solution to the grave crisis faced by us.
Because of the severe crisis facing the company, we could not file an appeal against AO's order in time.
We are enclosing herewith an affidavit also narrating all the facts.
We would hence submit that in the light of the above mentioned facts, the delay is due to the circumstances beyond our control. Accordingly we request you to kindly condone the delay and entertain our appeal."4 ITA No.1048/Chny/2019
It is clear from the above that the assessee suffered economic weakness and vulnerability which was beyond its control and hence there is sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Since the Ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues in the appeal on merits, we deem it fit to remit the issue back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A), who shall after affording due opportunity to the assessee, decide the issues on merits in accordance with law.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 2nd July, 2019 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(धु वु आर एल रे डी) ( एस जयरामन )
(Duvvuru R.L Reddy) (S. Jayaraman)
याियक सद य/Judicial Member लेखा सद य /Accountant Member
चे नई/Chennai,
दनांक/Dated 2nd July, 2019
RSR
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. आयकर आयु त (अपील)/CIT(A)
4. आयकर आयु त/CIT 5. वभागीय त न ध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF