9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of issues questioned by the Ld.CIT(A), ignoring the pleading of the assessee, in light of affidavit of Shri Nilesh Y.Jagiwala, Chartered Accountant, who attended the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act, along with certain judicial precedents, including the decision of Hon ble Bombay High court - The said findings of the Tribunal constitute a mistake apparent on record, which can be rectified u/s 254(2) of the I.T.Act, 1961. The order of Tribunal recalled - the registry directed to refix the case for hearing in due course - application allowed. - M.A. No.621 /Mum/2019 (Arising out of ITA No.7115/Mum/2018) - - - Dated:- 19-3-2020 - Shri Saktijit Dey (Judicial Member) And Shri G Manjunatha (Accountant Member) For the Applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay was caused on account of the wrong advice received from Shri Nilesh Y. Jagiwala, Chartered Accountant who attended the proceedings u/s. 263 of the Act. According to the said Chartered Accountant no action was required to be taken with respect to the order u/s. 263 of the Act since the consequential order could be challenged before the first appellate authority. The duly sworn affidavit tendered by Shri Jagiwala was also submitted in support of the request for condonation, in addition to that of the applicant. 3, Though the Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to observe in paragraph 5 that delay caused due to wrong advice of counsel could be reasonable cause for condoning delay, the request of the applicant was rejected by repeatedly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... challenge the action of any authority, then the same cannot be considered as wrong advise..... 4. In this regard, it is submitted that the following important facts and the contents of the documents have been completely overlooked by the Hon'ble Tribunal. (a) The assessee has never pleaded that since the Assessing Officer was determined to make the additions, it decided to file appeal. The assessee stated that since the Assessing Officer was determined to make the additions, it has approached the counsel for his advice. During the conference with the counsel, it was inquired by the counsel as to what was the status of the appeal against the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act. Thus, the Hon'ble Tribunal has misunderstood the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. The applicant, therefore, prays that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to: (a) recall the order dated 29.11.2019 in ITA No. 7115/Mum/2019 for hearing and disposal afresh and in accordance with law; (b) condone the delay of 191 days in filing the appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal; and/or (c) to pass any other order and/or direction as this Hon ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that there is an error in the order of the Tribunal, dated 29/11/2019, inasmuch as, the Tribunal has dismissed appeal filed by the assessee without condoning the delay in filing of appeal by holding that the reasons given by the assessee in its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumstances of the case, which is not permissible u/s 254(2) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the contents of miscellaneous application filed by the assessee, in light of the decision of the Tribunal, dated 29/11/2019 in ITA No.7115/Mum/2018 and we find that the Tribunal has dismissed appeal filed by the assesee by not condoning the delay of 191 days in filing the appeal for the reasons stated in its order dated 29/11/2019. Ongoing through, the reasons given by the Tribunal for rejection of the claim of the assessee for condonation of delay and the pleadings taken by the assessee in its miscellaneous application, we find that although, the Tribunal has accepted the fact that delay in filing appeal was du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
