Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Lucknow
M/S. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, ... vs Income Tax Officer- 2(4), Pilibhit on 28 February, 2019
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
LUCKNOW BENCH "B", LUCKNOW
BEFORE SHRI A.D JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND
SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Stay Petition No. 15/Lkw/2019
(In re: ITA No. 147/Lkw/2019)
Assessment Year 2015-16
&
ITA No. 147/Lkw/2019
A.Y. 2015-16
Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Vs. ITO -2 (4),
Puranpur, Pilibhit
PAN AABTK0457C
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by Ms. Shweta Mittal, FCA
Respondent by Shri C.K. Singh, DR
Date of hearing 26/02/2019
Date of pronouncement 28/02/2019
ORDER
PER: T.S. KAPOOR, A.M:
1. This is assessee's appeal for the Assessment Year 2015-16, taking the following grounds:-
"1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order which is unlawful, unjustified and against the principles of natural justice.
2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)s has erred in law and on facts in not admitting the appeal filed before him.2 SA No. 15/Lkw/2019 (ITA No. 147/Lkw/2019)
3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in not admitting the appeal and deciding it without hearing on merits.
4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in not deciding the grounds of appeal filed before him and giving relief sought by the appellant, the details of which are as under:
1. Exemption u/s 10(26AAB) of Income Tax Act, 1961
2. Exemption u/s 11, 12 & 13 of Income Tax Act, 1961"
2. By virtue of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee's appeal by observing that the assessee has not given plausible reason for condonation of delay.
3. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We noted that this is a case where the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee and not admitted the same as the appeal was barred by limitation. Though the assessee had explained the reason for not filing the appeal in time, the same was rejected by ld. CIT(A) as according to him the reason given by the assessee was not a valid reason. The ld. CIT(A) has mentioned in his order under Para 2.0 that the assessee had mentioned the reason of late filing of appeal in column 15 of Form 35 but the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the application of the assessee and did not condone the delay. The ld. A.R. has contended that ld. CIT(A) has not provided the assessee an opportunity to explain his case before treating the reason given in column 15 of Form 35 as not valid. The assessee has 3 SA No. 15/Lkw/2019 (ITA No. 147/Lkw/2019) contended that it has explained the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). It has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Apex Court and various High Courts that while dealing with the condonation of delay, the authority should consider it sympathetically and instead of dismissing the appeal, the authority should dispose of it on merit. It seems that there is merely a technical default for delay in filing the appeal as per the reasons given by the assessee in column 15 of Form 35. We, therefore, do not find ourselves in agreement with the order of the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, we set aside his order and direct the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the appeal on merit, on affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
4. Since we have disposed of the appeal on merit, as above, the stay application filed by the assessee has become academic and infructuous.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The application for stay is dismissed as infructuous.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28/02/2019.
Sd/- Sd/- (A.D. Jain) (T.S. Kapoor) Vice President Accountant Member Aks - Dtd. 28/02/2019 4 SA No. 15/Lkw/2019 (ITA No. 147/Lkw/2019) Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order Assistant Registrar