9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 879X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l 2. Admittedly, there is a delay of 188 days in filing the appeal in ITA No.2739/Bang/2018 and delay of 156 days in filing the appeals in ITA No.2740 and 2741/Bang/2018 before the Tribunal. In this regard, the petitioner / assessee has filed separate petitions for condonation of delay in filing these three appeals accompanied by Affidavits sworn to by the petitioner / assessee. In these Affidavits, the assessee / petitioner has submitted the following identical reasons for delay in filing these three appeals before the Tribunal, which are extracted hereunder: "4. That, soon after the receipt of the aforesaid appellate order, I could not immediately contact our AR Mr. Lingaraje Gowda, Advocate because of my ill-health that was caused by Paralysis several years ago as a result of long years of hyper tension and diabetes. 5. That, I was in and out of hospital from March, 2018 onwards and even after my recovery and discharge from hospital, I continued to remain confined to my bed in the residence on account of my illness. 6. That, even now I am not fully fit and attending to all matters and it is only when I received a call from the income tax department about the arrears, I co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt and reasonable cause for the delay of 188 days in filing the appeal in ITA No.2739/Bang/2018 and the delay of 156 days in filing the appeals in ITA Nos.2740/Bang/2018 and 2741/Bang/2018. Since, even if the aforesaid delays are condoned, no loss would be caused to Revenue, as legitimate taxes payable in accordance with law alone will be collected. In the aforesaid factual matrix of the case and respectfully following the judicial precedents on the subject referred to above, we condone the delay of 188 days in filing the appeal in ITA No.2739/Bang/2018 and the delay of 156 days in filing the appeals in ITA No.2740/Bang/2018 and ITA No.2741/Bang/2018; and consequently admit these appeals for consideration and adjudication. It is accordingly ordered. ORDER 4. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in each of these three appeals are extracted hereunder:- 4.1 ITA No.2739/Bang/2018 - Assessment Year 2006-07 1. The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant, are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in disposing off the appeal ex-parte without al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act and the same ought to have been allowed. 8. Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver with the Hon'ble CCIT/DG, the appellant denies himself liable to be charged to interest u/s. 234-A and 234-B of the Act, which under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case deserves to be cancelled. 9. For the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, your appellant humbly prays that the appeal may be allowed and Justice rendered and the appellant may be awarded costs in prosecuting the appeal and also order for the refund of the institution fees as part of the costs. 4.2 ITA No.2740/Bang/2018 - Assessment Year 2006-07 1. The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant, are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in disposing off the appeal without allowing sufficient and real opportunity to the appellant to represent his case before the learned CIT[A] under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 3. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the penalty of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee that all these three appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) in limine, without deciding the issues / grounds raised on merits. In ITA No.2739/Bang/2018, the assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for the reason that the assessee had not mentioned the PAN in the respective Form No.35 filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) and thereby violating the provisions of section 249 of the Act. In respect to the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.2740 and 2741/Bang/2018, it was submitted by the learned AR that as is evident from a perusal for these impugned orders of the CIT(A), only one date of hearing had been afforded by the CIT(A) to the assessee, i.e., on 18.09.2017 and that the AR for the assessee had filed adjournment petition on the very same day i.e., on 18.09.2017 seeking adjournment which was not considered by the CIT(A). It was prayed that in the interest of equity and justice, these impugned orders of CIT(A) be set aside and the matters restored to the file of CIT(A) for fresh examination and adjudication and as the assessee has since obtained PAN, it should be held that there is no violation of section 249 of the Act. 4.5 Per contra, the learned DR for Revenue supported t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
