2016 (1) TMI 30 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay in filing of appeal - delay of 3 years - Notice of demand u/s 156 - non serve of notice on the assessee along with the assessment order and computation form challenged - Held that - The assessee stated in his letter dated 27th January, 2011 addressed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) that it was only after it received the order of the Tribunal on 30.7.2010 for the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04 the status of the appeal in respect of the instant asstt. Year 2004-05 was examined and it was pointed out that no appeal has been filed, as no notice of demand was received. This statement shows that during the entire interregnum period of more than three years, the assessee has not pursued the matter to obtain the -NIL notice of demand. This period of delay has not been explained. On the argument that an appeal was not filed on the advise of the Chartered Accountant, the only evidence filed is an affidavit of the employee of the assessee. This is a self-serving document as the Chartered Accountant has not corroborated the same. Under these circumstances, we concur with the view of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee could not demonstrate that, it was prevented by sufficient cause, in filing this appeal within the time stipulated under the Act. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld.CIT(A). In none of the cases as relied it has been laid down that in each and every case, condonation has to be granted as a matter of rule. Unlike in the cases cited, the basic reason cited by the assessee in this case is found incorrect. Hence there is a factual difference. In this case, the department has produced evidence to prove that notice u/s 156 was dispatched along with the assessment order to the assessee. As already noted the very ground on which the assessee based its entire case for condonation of delay fails and consequently we uphold the order of the first appellate authority and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal.
2. Service of notice of demand u/s 156 of the Income Tax Act.
3. Adjudication of issues in favor of the assessee in preceding years.
4. Addition made to income as interest income.

Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) for the assessment year 2004-05. The appellant contended that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the non-receipt of the notice of demand u/s 156. The appellant argued that the appeal could only be filed upon receipt of the notice of demand and that the delay was caused by a bonafide belief that no appeal could be filed without the notice of demand. The appellant also cited various case laws to support the claim for condonation of delay.

Service of Notice of Demand u/s 156 of the Income Tax Act:
The Department produced evidence showing that the notice of demand u/s 156 was dispatched along with the assessment order to the assessee. The appellant denied receiving the notice but failed to provide evidence to counter the documentary evidence produced by the Department. The Tribunal presumed that the notice of demand was served based on the evidence presented by the Department. The appellant's argument for condonation of delay was found to lack merit due to this presumption.

Adjudication of Issues in Favor of the Assessee in Preceding Years:
The appellant argued that the issues in the instant appeal were identical to those in preceding assessment years where the Hon'ble ITAT had ruled in favor of the assessee. However, the Tribunal held that each case is unique, and the factual circumstances must be considered individually. The Tribunal found that the grounds cited by the assessee were incorrect, as evidence showed that the notice of demand had been dispatched to the assessee, contrary to the appellant's claim.

Addition Made to Income as Interest Income:
The appellant contested the addition made to income as interest income, arguing that similar additions in preceding years had been deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT and Hon'ble HC. The Tribunal, however, upheld the addition made to income, stating that the appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time under the Act. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, upholding the order of the first appellate authority. The Tribunal found that the appellant could not establish sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal and that the grounds presented by the appellant were not supported by evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the specific facts and circumstances of each case in matters of condonation of delay and upheld the decision based on the evidence presented regarding the service of the notice of demand u/s 156.