TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee learnt about the non-filing of the appeal before the PCIT. No such evidence / document had been filed before us. Law requires the assessee to be vigilant and careful in prosecuting its rights under the Act. In the present case, as pointed out by the ld. DR that the revisional order was passed on 28.02.2019 and thereafter, AO after issuing notice had issued the order giving effect u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 on 31.12.2019. Almost 10 months have passed between passing of the revisional order and consequential order passed by the AO, yet the assessee has chosen not to proceed against the order of PCIT. Assessee appeal dismissed. - Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Accountant Member And Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member For the Assessee by: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me returned, therefore, erred in passing an order u/s 263 assuming that the order u/s 143(3) is erroneous and prejudicial. 6. The learned Pr. Commissioner ought to have appreciated that issue of disallowance u/s 14A is not under the purview of scrutiny as the case is selected to examine the share premium and expenses claimed, therefore, erred in passing an order u/s 263 assuming that the order u/s 143(3) is erroneous and prejudicial. 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a company who filed its e-return of income of Rs.15,54,300/- on 28.11.2014. The case was taken up for scrutiny under CASS by the issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. Subsequently, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued from time to time calling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ld.PCIT quashing the assessment made u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.20.12.2016 passed under section 263 of the Act. 6. At the outset, ld. AR had submitted that there is a delay of 988 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, the same may kindly be condoned. In this regard, he filed the following written submissions made by the Director of the assessee company : The assessee is in the business of development of infrastructure projects. Return of income was filed u/s 139(1) admitting an income of Rs.15,54,300/- for the subject assessment year. The case was selected under CASS for verification of large share premium received during the year and large other expenses claimed in the profit and loss account. Considering the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase and also the situation prevailing from March 2021 to till date on account of Covid Pandemic and further to consider the company s position which has no activity after April 2018 and prayed to condone the delay of 986 days in filing the appeal. 7. On the other hand, ld. DR had submitted that the order of the ld.PCIT was duly served on the assessee and submitted that the ld.PCIT passed order on 28.02.2019 and thereafter, Assessing Officer had passed assessment order on 31.12.2019, thereby giving effect to the order of ld.PCIT. It was further submitted that after passing of the assessment order on 31.12.2019, the assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) on 07.07.2022 and thereafter, the present appeal was filed by the assessee befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicial scrutiny on the grounds of technicalities, then you may deprive the right of the petitioner in pursuing their case. At the same time, various Courts have held that rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties, they are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek their remedy promptly, within the time bound prescribed under the Act. 10. Further, in a case, where, for the reasons beyond the control of the petitioner, the appeal could not be filed, then the Courts are well equipped with power to condone the delay, if the petitioner explains the delay in filing of the appeal with a reasonable cause. However, there is no law or mandate in the Act, to condone the delay in each and every cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee that the Assessing Officer has sent a reminder in respect of payment of tax arrears and then only the assessee learnt about the non-filing of the appeal before the ld.PCIT. No such evidence / document had been filed before us. 13. In our view, the law requires the assessee to be vigilant and careful in prosecuting its rights under the Act. In the present case, as pointed out by the ld. DR that the revisional order was passed on 28.02.2019 and thereafter, the Assessing Officer after issuing notice had issued the order giving effect u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act on 31.12.2019. Almost 10 months have passed between passing of the revisional order and consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer, yet the assessee has cho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
