9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the onus would have then been on the assessee to rebut the same. If the order of assessment was duly served on the partner of the firm as far back as on 26.03.2013, i.e. barely four days after passing of the order, the affidavit of the tax consultant of the assessee that he had received the order but had not passed on a copy thereof to the assessee, would be of no consequence. Matter remanded back. - TAX APPEAL NO. 267 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 1-8-2017 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. BIREN VAISHNAV, JJ. For The Appellant : Ms Vaibhavi K Parikh, Advocate For The Opponent : Mr Pranav G Desai, Advocate ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. This Tax Appeal is filed by the assessee to challenge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment dated 20.03.2015, confirmed the view of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The rectification application of the assessee was also rejected on 11.08.2016. 6. The short question involved in the present appeal is whether the assessee made out sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the time. Section 249 of the Act, while laying down the period of limitation of 30 days for presenting the appeal before the appellate Commissioner, under subsection (3) thereof, empowers the Commissioner to admit an appeal after the period of limitation if he is satisfied that the appellant has provided sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within such period. The Commissioner therefore on sufficient cause being demonstrated, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfronted with such acknowledgment stated to have been signed by the partner of the assessee firm. We would however not be technical and deprive an opportunity to Revenue to bring such averments on record which if established, would go to the root of the matter. In other words, if the order of assessment was duly served on the partner of the firm as far back as on 26.03.2013, i.e. barely four days after passing of the order, the affidavit of the tax consultant of the assessee that he had received the order but had not passed on a copy thereof to the assessee, would be of no consequence. 7. Under the circumstances, we remand the proceedings to the appellate Commissioner for reconsideration of question of delay. It would be open for the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
