Harpal Singh , Bangalore Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(2)(1), Bangalore

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.262/Bang/2019
Assessment Year: 2013-14

Harpal Singh No.144, 1st Main Road 11th Cross, Ideal Homes Rajarajeshwari Nagar Bengaluru-560 098
PAN NO : AFKPS1542J
APPELLANT 
Vs.
ACIT Circle-3(2)(1) Bengaluru
RESPONDENT

Appellant by : Shri S.V. Ravishankar &
Shri Pranav Krishna, A.Rs
Respondent by : Shri Priaydarshi Mishra, D.R.
Date of Hearing : 22.10.2020
Date of Pronouncement : 22.10.2020

O R D E R

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 18.12.2018 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-3, Bengaluru and it relates to assessment year 2013-14.

2. We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that there was a delay of 451 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A). Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay by observing that there exists no sufficient or good reason for condoning inordinate delay of 451 days in filing appeal before him. The Ld. CIT(A) has taken support of decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 361 and also the decision rendered in the case of Chief Post Master General and Others Vs.Living Media India Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 7. He also taken the view that the above said delay is an inordinate delay.

3. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the relevant documents were submitted by the assessee to his auditor and in turn the auditor sought for a opinion from tax advocate. The papers were misplaced in the advocate’s office and hence the appeal could not be filed in time. Accordingly, he submitted that there was no wilful default and the delay has occurred due to reasons beyond the control of the assessee. He further submitted that the assessee would be put to irreparable loss if the appeal is not decided on merits. Accordingly,he prayed that the delay in filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A) may be condoned.

4. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. who strongly supported the order passed by Ld. CIT(A).

To know more in details find the attachment file