9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itan Sessions Judge, Vijayawada dated 30th May, 2014 as supportive evidence of dentation. So, considering the reasons and also detention of the Managing Director during the period of assessment, we find there is sufficient cause in the factual circumstances. We condone the delay and direct the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to adjudicate appeal on merit. - I.T.A. No.2283/Mds/2015 - - - Dated:- 30-3-2016 - SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri. G. Seetharaman, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri. A.V. Sreekantha, JCIT. ORDER PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r s report, it has been stated that we do not express any opinion on whether the accounts give a true and fair view in conformity with the accounting principles generally accepted in India. As the re-assessment is getting time barred by 31.03.2014 and as the director of the company had not responded to any notices including summon issued, the assessment is completed after discussion with the Authorirsed Representative exparte Based on the observations of the statutory Auditor and available material, the Assessing Officer completed assessment by disallowing expenses as no satisfactory explanations was furnished that expenses are exclusively incurred for the purpose of business ₹ 47,65,485/-. On perusal of the fixed assets of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period of 30 days from the date of intimation of order. Whereas the appeal was filed on 25.06.2014 and condonation petition was filed explaining the reasons and circumstances referred at page 2 of CIT order as under:- 1. The assessment order and demand notice for the assessment year 2009-10 were served on someone on 02.04.2014. On that basis, the appeal should have been filed on or before 03.05.2014. 2. It is filed on 25.06.2014 after a delay of 52 days. 3. The Managing Director of the Company was under detention by the Andhra Police for alleged violation of money circulation scheme from 16.02.2014 and was released only on 02.06.2014. She reached Chennai on 15.06.2014. 4. Substantial questions of laws and facts are i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessment order, The Auditor do not express any opinion on true and fair view of the accounts. The assessee company passed through genuine hardship and have fair chances of succeeding in appeal on merits and produced order copy of criminal petition of detention of Managing Director. 6. Contra, the ld. Departmental Representative vehemently opposed for condoning the delay. 7. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record and judicial decisions cited. Before us, the ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee reiterated submissions made before the Assessing Officer and also on delay in filing the appeal in appellate proceedings. Considering the submissions of Authorised Representative on delay, we highlight the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erate. This Court has held that the words 'sufficient cause' under section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi Jain V. Kuntal Kumari, AIR 1969 SC 575 and State of West Bengal V. the Administrator, Howah Municapacity, AIR 1972 SC 749. Further, we refer the case of State of West Bengal vs. Administrator, Howrah Municipality, AIR 1972 SC 749, the Supreme Court held that expression sufficient cause should receive a liberal construction so as to advance the purpose of justice particularly when there is no motive behind delay. This necessarily implies that parties must act bonafidely, expeditiously and with due care. A casual or a negligent litigan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... realized that: 1. Ordinarily, a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this, when delay is condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause wouldbe decided on merits after hearing the parties. 1. Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period. ( Page 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
