Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Land Marvel Homes, Chennai vs Acit, Chennai on 23 February, 2017
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, 'डी' यायपीठ, चे ई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'D' BENCH, CHENNAI
ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, याियक सद य एवं
ी अ ाहम पी.जॉज , लेखा सद य के सम
BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 3399/Mds/2016
िनधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2011-12
Ms/. Land Marvel Homes, The Asstt. Commissioner of
No.2, 1st Main Road, (Basement), v. Income Tax,
Indira Nagar, Adyar, Business Circle IV,
Chennai - 600 020. Chennai - 34.
PAN : AABFL4387N
(अपीलाथ!/Appellant) ("#यथ!/Respondent)
अपीलाथ! क$ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri D. Anand, Advocate
"#यथ! क$ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri B. Durai Pandian, JCIT
सुनवाई क$ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09.02.2017
घोषणा क$ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.02.2017
आदेश /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 15, Chennai dated 16.09.2016 and pertains to the assessment year 2011-12.
2. Shri D. Anand, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that there was a delay of 168 days in filing the appeal before the 2 I.T.A. No.3399/Mds/2016 CIT (Appeals). According to the Ld. counsel the delay in filing the appeal was due to mixing up of the order of the Tribunal with other papers in the office of the assessee. The appeal was filed before the CIT (Appeals) on 29.09.2014 immediately after the order of the CIT (Appeals) was traced out. Therefore the assessee was prevented from sufficient cause in filing the appeal. The Ld. counsel further submitted that an opportunity may be given to the assessee to argue the case on merit before the CIT (Appeals).
3. On the contrary Shri B. Durai Pandian, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that there was no reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation. Mixing up of papers with other papers cannot be a reason for condoning the delay. According to the Ld. D.R., the assessee is a partnership firm and doing business activity of considerable magnitude in terms of turnover. Since there was no bonafide reason for not filing the appeal before CIT (Appeals), the CIT (Appeals) has rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. Even though the CIT 3 I.T.A. No.3399/Mds/2016 (Appeals) observed that the delay was 198 days, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submits that the delay in fact was only 168 days. This fact is not disputed by the Revenue. The question arises for consideration is when the assessee claims that the order of CIT (Appeals), which was served on the assessee got mixed up with other papers and the appeal was filed immediately after the order was traced out, whether that can constitute a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal before CIT (Appeals). This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that mixing up of the order with other papers is a human error which may happen to anyone and the assessee is not an exemption to that kind of human error. Even though the assessee is a partnership firm, the human error cannot be avoided in all cases. Moreover giving one more opportunity to the assessee to argue the case on merit may not prejudice the interest of Revenue in anyway. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that giving such opportunity would definitely promote cause of justice.
5. The objective of the Income Tax Act is to assess the taxable income and levy tax thereon. The Revenue cannot levy the tax unless it was authorized by law. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that nothing wrong in computing the taxable 4 I.T.A. No.3399/Mds/2016 income as per the provisions of law after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Since the assessee claims that the order was mixed up with other papers, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there was a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation. Therefore, the delay of 168 days in filing the appeals before the CIT (Appeals) is hereby condoned and the appeal of the assessee stands restored on the file of the CIT (Appeals). The CIT (Appeals) is directed to dispose the appeal on merit in accordance with law after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
6. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced on 23rd February, 2017 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(अ ाहम पी.जॉज ) (एन.आर.एस. गणेशन)
(Abraham P. George) (N.R.S. Ganesan)
लेखा सद य/Accountant Member याियक सद य/Judicial Member
चे ई/Chennai,
दनांक/Dated, the 23 February, 2017.
rd
JR.
आदेश क$ "ितिलिप अ&ेिषत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ!/Appellant 2. "#यथ!/Respondent
3. आयकर आयु) (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु)/CIT,
5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF.