9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the same was barred by limitation. 3. None has come present on behalf of the assessee despite notice being sent. 4. We have gone through the grounds of appeal and are of the view that the appeal can be disposed of after hearing the Ld. D.R. 5. The present appeal before us is time barred by 361 days. No application for condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee along with the appeal. A defect notice was also issued by the Registry on 18.03.15 wherein it was mentioned that the appeal was barred by 361 days and that the assessee had not filed any condonation petition/affidavit in this respect but till date no remedial action has been taken by the assessee. 6. After going through the impugned order, we find that the appeal bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... davit that he, even did not advice the assessee to file the appeal against the order passed by the AO under section 143(3) of the Act when the notice initiating the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) was also served on the assessee along with the order under section 143(3) of the Act. The said Chartered Accountant has further affirmed that the assessee, thus, had not filed the appeal in the absence of his advice to do so. Hence, the delay in filing the appeal was not attributable to the assessee but solely attributable to absence of such advice from his side. The Ld. CIT(A) considered the above submissions found that the assessee did not have any sufficient cause which prevented it from filing the appeal in time. Moreover, the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the AO may waive the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act if the assessee would cooperate in the assessment proceedings and did not contest the same in appeal. It has also been deposed by him that he advised the assessee not to carry the matter in appeal under the belief that in doing so, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) would not be attracted. He even did not advise the assessee to file the appeal even though the notice initiating the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was also served on the assessee along with order under section 143(3) of the Act. The above contentions of the said authorized representative thus were self contradictory. His belief that penalty would not be levied under section 271(1)(c) was already got cleared/co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chartered Accountant of the assessee, firstly the assessee in fact was not aggrieved by the order under section 143(3) but of the penalty order under section 271(1)(c); secondly the assessee has not shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), hence, there is no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in rejecting the application for condonation of delay. 10. Even no application for condonation of delay has been filed before this Tribunal. No reasons/circumstances for filing the appeal with a delay of 361 days has been explained before us. It seems that the assessee again failed to take advice from his senior counsel even after dismissal of his appeal for the same reason by the Ld. CIT(A). He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
