9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailable on the record, fail to invoke any confidence, fail to explain reasonable and sufficient cause for condonation of long delay of 347 days in filing these appeals . The assessee has to come clean with all the relevant facts, which happened in the period of one year. The assessee has to explain all the events and be specific in the dates. The depositions made in the C.A. affidavit remain uncorroborated and there is no affidavit from the said Shri Malik Parvej in support of the affidavit of C.A.. Thus, the vague affidavit given by the C.A. remains uncorroborated and unreliable. In the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, we decline to condone the delay of 347 days in filing these appeals. - Appeal dismissed. - ITA Nos. 402 & 403/JP/2012 - - - Dated:- 13-2-2015 - SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri P C Parwal (C.A.) For the Respondent : Mrs. Neena Jeph Sr. DR ORDER R.P. TOLANI, J.M. These are two assessee s appeals against the order dated 28/02/2011 passed by the learned CIT(A), Kota for A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07. Common grounds are raised in both the appeals, which are as under: 1. The learned Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 340190/- ₹ 1249712/- Total Income Rs. 1241561/- R/o ₹ 1241560/- For A.Y. 2006-07 Deficit as per income and expenditure account Rs. (-) 14228/- Add-(as discussed above) i. Excess Payment of Salary ₹ 1108571/- ii. Other expenses ₹ 340190/- ₹ 189012/- ₹ 1297583/- Total Income ₹ 1283355/- R/o ₹ 1283360/- 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal which was dismissed by learned CIT(A) holding as under:- For A.Y. 2005-06 As mentioned above, it was admitted by Shri Abid Khan, Secretary of society in his statement recorded during the course of survey that expenses on account of salary and other heads are inflated. He also stated that the amount has been utilized for the construction purpose. Subsequently, no evidence was furnished by appellant either before A.O. or the undersigned to prove that expenses are not infla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... war for A.Y. 05-06 and 06-07. This appeal was decided by CIT(A) against the society order was sent to the society in the month of March 2011. 3. That Sh. Malik Parvej, President of the Society, handed me the said order sometime in the first week of April 2011 for necessary action. I kept the order with me for filing the appeal before I.T.A.T.. In the meanwhile, I went to NAGAUR (Raj.) for bank audit of ABBJ. When I returned back from bank audit, the filing of appeal before ITAT skipped from my mind and papers were filed in my record. 4. That now when Sh. Malik Parvej, President of the Society, approached me with the notice of TRO dt. 02.03.2012 for recovery of demand for these A.Y. s on 20.03.2012, it came to my notice that appeal before Hon ble ITAT has not been filed against the order of CIT(A). 5. That in these circumstances, there is a delay in filing of appeal before Hon ble ITAT in above case due to my mistake. 6. That the facts stated in para 1 to 5 above are true correct to the best of my knowledge belief. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the concerned Chartered Accountant has admitted that the impugned orders of CIT(A) were handed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt details have been mentioned in the affidavit. (vi) It is surprising and does not appeal to logic that neither any office assistant from the team of C.A. or assessee reminded him during one year about non filing of such important and high demand appeals. (vii) No affidavit of Shri Malik Parvej is filed to corroborate the deposition of the C.A.. (viii) The notice of TRO dated 2nd March, 2012 is mentioned as an eye opener for the CA and assessee to file the appeals whereas in income tax proceeding, assessee is reminded to pay the outstanding demand of tax and interest not only on telephone but by other notice from the Assessing Officer before sending default cases to TRO. (ix) No averment is made in the affidavit that except TRO notice, no other communication was made by department either by way of telephone or in writing. (x) Shri Malik Parvej has not filed any affidavit to corroborate the version that in fact that anybody from assessee s side never visited or reminded the CA about such a huge outstanding demand and pending appeals, more so when the issues about returns of subsequent years are process of registration may have been discussed between them. (xi) It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... occasions are not mentioned with proper facts then the delay cannot be condoned. In this behalf, we rely on the decision of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT (2009) 317 ITR 458 (Mad). The Hon ble High Court has held as under:- Held, dismissing the appeal, that it was clear that the assessee had not explained the cause of delay in filing the appeal, especially when the authorized representative who was given charge to file the appeal had died exactly one year after the last date for filing of the appeal. Even after the death of the authorized representative the assessee had taken more than six months to file the appeal. The assessee had neither given any particular or details in the affidavit as to the date on which the papers were handed over to the counsel for preparing the appeal and on what occasion the assessee enquired about the progress in preparing the appeal and filing it. The assessee had not taken a proper plea to show sufficient cause giving evidence and proof beyond reasonable doubt for the delay. There was no need to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. In this judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court citation i.e. Collector, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
