9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order was passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kurnool on 04/03/2015. It was served on 28/03/2015. As I was not well conversant with the facts of the case and on the basis of the order passed by the Assessing Officer, I relied on some professional, who did not appear before the Assessing Officer or before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kurnool. 4. The order passed by the Assessing Officer was u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144 of the LT. Act, 1961. Thus, it was an order passed without my representation as advocates in this area who are supposed to appear on my behalf and to whom I had given the Power of Attorney did not appear before the Revenue Authorities and the matter ended with an order being passed ex-parte by the Assessing Officer on 25/03/2013. 5. On further appeal to the Ld CIT (A), Kurnool, my Authorised Representative did not appear and the CIT (A) dispose of the appeal on the ground there were no compliances and that there being no response and merely relying on the reasons of the AO, dismissed the appeal. There was no adjudication on merits. 6. Later sometime in the first week of April, 2019, I approached Mr. Bhaskara Reddy, Advocate, who informed me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ince the assessment was also completed ex-parte the assessee u/s 144 of the Act. 5. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly opposed the condonation of delay stating that there was also a delay of 292 days in filing of appeal before the CIT (A) which was not condoned by the CIT (A). Therefore according to him, it is evident that the assessee has not been vigilant in protecting his interest and has not filed an appeal with bonafide reasons. He therefore, submitted that the orders of the AO and the CIT (A) should be confirmed. 6. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, I find that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Act, because none appeared for the assessee before the AO inspite of several notices issued to him u/s 143(2) and 142(1) on 12.01.2012, 6.02.2012, 4.5.2012, 31.07.2012, 21.8.2012, 10.09.2012, 22.10.2012. The assessee's representative had appeared only on 29.09.2012 but did not furnish any information called for by the AO and it was in these circumstances, that the AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144 by estimating the income from wine business and also by disallowing sundry creditors to the extent of Rs. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Hosanna Ministries (Cited Supra) also, there was a delay of 1902 days in preferring the appeal and the reasons for the delay was that the assessee was not aware that an appeal could be filed to the Tribunal against the order of the rejection of registration by the CIT (A) u/s 12AA of the Act and it is only after obtaining the professional advise that the appeal was filed. 6.4 The Hon'ble Madras High Court at Para 21 to 27 of its order has held as under: 21. Now, we come to the main reason i.e., the reason of delay shown for the rejection of the appeal through the impugned order. No doubt, the delay of 1902 days is a huge and enormous delay. But, when we look at the reasons given by the assessee for such a delay, it shows that it is not attributable to any lame excuses on medical grounds or otherwise. But, it is only the reason of either non advise on the part of the professional, who has been engaged by the assessee or the ignorance of law by the assessee itself. Assessee knew well that if a plea of ignorance of law is taken, that would be, on the face of it, rejected by the court/Tribunal, nevertheless, such a plea alone had been taken by the assessee and that itself w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... situation in a related appeal in T.C.A.No.886/2016 where also the very same facts have been given or adduced by the assessee for the huge delay of 1631 days in approaching the Tribunal. After having considered the very same reason cited in the said case as has been stated herein also, we have taken a view that in the given circumstances even such a huge delay can be condoned. The relevant portion of the order of us passed today in the said appeal is extracted hereunder: 6.1. A perusal of the petition for condonation of delay would show, (as was contended before us by the learned counsel for the appellant), that the Chartered Accountant engaged in the matter, one, Mr.A.Johnson, FCA, was unaware of the fact that an appeal could be filed against the order of the CIT, post the amendment made in Section 253(1)(c) of the Act. 6.2. The reason, we have come to the conclusion that the counsel for the Assessee would have taken instructions from the Assessee in preparing the petition for condonation of delay, is, because, the name of the Chartered Accountant is mentioned in the petition. Learned counsel could not have conjured up the name of the Chartered Accountant. There is nothing on r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to presume, in the absence of any material placed before the Court, that the appellant had full knowledge of its right to exemption so as to warrant an inference that the appellant waived such right by addressing the letter dated 25th June, 1970. We accordingly reject the plea of waiver raised on behalf of the State Government. ....... (emphasis is ours) 25. In view of these reasons, the order impugned of the Tribunal rejecting the appeal of the assessee mainly on the ground of delay, is liable to be interfered with. In addition, we also feel that the further reason given by the Tribunal for arriving at such a conclusion that the assessee was not engaging in activities in accordance with the objects specified in the trust deed also is not supported by materials as we are satisfied that the assessee has been functioning after proper registration with the authorities concerned under the Juvenile Act and a recent certification issued dated 14.12.2016 of the authorities concerned as referred to above would be valid for next five years. Therefore, the genuineness or otherwise of the functioning of the assessee cannot be easily doubted, in view of the certification issued by the Direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
