Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 232 - AT - Income TaxCondonation of delay - against two order for penalty U/s. 271AAA and u/s 271(l)(c) joint one appeal was filed - subsequently after decision of CIT(A) separate appeal was filed with delay - bonafide mistake in giving the wrong advice - HELD THAT:- We find that the occasion for the ld. Commissioner to dismiss the appeal holding that ignorance of law cannot be a justifiable reason the order cannot be upheld. We find ourselves unable to concur with the conclusion drawn. In the facts of the present case Shri Dinesh Kumar Sood, C.A. as per the copy of his affidavit filed on record has pleaded a bonafide mistake in giving the wrong advice. In the circumstances, we are, even otherwise unable to hold how the assessee can be penalized for no fault of its own. The assessee having engaged a counsel admittedly has acted duly, diligently and responsibly. In the facts of the present case, we have seen that no undue advantage has been derived by the assessee by filing the appeal late and no vested right of the Revenue can be said to have been disturbed in case the delay is condoned. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observations and directions in terms of the pronouncement made in the Open Court, we set aside the impugned order back to the file of the CIT(A) to verify the facts whether the assessee in the year under consideration had challenged the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) and 271AAA by filing a single appeal. In case, on facts the pleadings of the assessee are found to be correct, the mistake at best, we hold, can be said to be a technical mistake which stands corrected. The ld. CIT(A) in the circumstances subject to verification is directed to condone the delay and proceed to pass the order on merits in accordance with law. - Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
|