9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has filed applications for condonation of delay which are also supported by the affidavit of the assessee (Principal Maulana Azad Inter College). 3. The learned AR of the assessee has submitted that the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) was received by the assessee on 17th January, 2018 however, due to board examination scheduled to be conducted in the premises of the assessee school in the month of February, 2018 the entire record of the office of the assessee was shifted out and was stored at a separate location. In this process, the impugned order got misplaced and was traced only on 5th December, 2018 when one Mr. Anwar Ahmad Khan was going through the office record has located and found the said order. The learned counsel has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. 5. I have considered the rival contentions as well as relevant material on record. The assessee has explained the delay of 271 days in filing these appeals due to the reasons that after receiving the impugned order on 17th January, 2018, the premises of the assessee were taken over by the education board for conducting the board examination scheduled to be held in the month of February, 2018. The assessee has narrated all these reasons and facts in the affidavit filed alongwith the application for condonation of delay. The facts as explained by the assessee in the affidavit are not in dispute so far as the receipt of the impugned order and conducting of board examination by the board and consequently the office record of the assessee w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... / cause explained by the assessee, I am satisfied that the assessee has a sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. Hence, in the interest of justice, the delay of 271 days in filing these appeals is condoned. 7. The assessee has raised common grounds in these appeals. The grounds raised for the assessment year 2008-09 are as under:- BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), dismissing the appeal of the assessee and upholding the order u/s 272A(2)(k)/274 levying penalty for Rs. 1,57,170/- is both bad in law as well as on facts and is liable to be quashed being made without observing the procedure establish under law. BECAUSE, on the facts and in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is both bad in law as well as on facts and is liable to be quashed since the person against whom the said order has bee made is not the Drawing & Disbursing Officer and hence not liable for penalty under law and TAN is held in the name of "Manager" of the society. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ex parte whereas the assessee did not receive the alleged last two notices as referred by the CIT(A). He has pointed out that in response to the first notice, the assessee filed an application for adjournment of hearing which was adjourned by the CIT(A) however, no subsequent notice was received by the assessee regarding the date of hearing fixed by the CIT(A). He has also referred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ool and not in the name of Principal of the college. Thus, the learned DR has submitted that the matter may be set aside to the record of the AO or CIT(A) for considering the issue raised by the assessee which go to the root of the matter. The assessee may be granted an opportunity to present his case before the authorities below. 10. On the other hand, learned DR has submitted that the assessee is a habitual defaulter for not appearing before the authorities below despite the sufficient opportunities were granted. He has further contended that the assessee has never raised any objection regarding the validity of the penalty proceedings on the ground of responsible person is the Manager and not the Principal of the college. Thus, the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the said date of hearing. Since the assessee did not attend the hearing on 10.09.2017, the CIT(A) issued notice on 10.11.2017 for the hearing on 29.11.2017 and thereafter a further notice issued on 8.12.2017 for the hearing on 21.12.2017. There is no attendance on behalf of the assessee on these two hearings and consequently the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing a summary order without discussing the facts or grounds raised by the assessee. The assessee has submitted that these two notices as alleged by the CIT(A) were not received by the assessee however, since the appeals of the assessee were dismissed summarily by the CIT(A) without passing a speaking order therefore, the impugned orders passed by the CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
