K.s.sridhar v. The Income Tax Officer, Salary Ward-Vi(2), Chennai

DATED: 22.4.2019 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN Tax Case Appeal No.660 of 2018andC.M.P.No.13038 of 2018 K.S.Sridhar Appellant/Petitioner Vs. 1. The Income Tax Officer, Salary Ward-VI(2), Chennai. 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "SMC", C-Branch, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090. Respondents/Respondents Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' (SMC) Bench, Chennai, dated 20.4.2018 madein M.P.No.20/CHNY/2018 in ITA No.3249/Mds/2016 against the orderof the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)15, 121, MahathmaGandhi Road, Nungambakka, Chennai 600 034 GIR No./PAN AMFPS0388Adated 25.04.2016 Assessment year 2007-2008 and against IncomeTax officer, Salary Ward VI(2) Chennai PAN-GIR No.AMFPS0388AAssessment year 2007-2008. For Appellant : Ms.Kothai Muthu Meenal for M/s. Waraon & SairamsFor Respondents: Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.K.G.Usharani (Delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J) The Assessee K.S.Sridhar, an individual, who was workingas General Manager in a Private Company viz., M/s.Vibgyor https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Automotive Private Limited, Chennai, has filed this Tax Case(Appeal) under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, aggrieved bythe order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunaldated 20.4.2018, dismissing the petition filed by him praying toreview the order passed by the Tribunal on 5.12.2017, rejectingthe Appeal filed by the Assessee as barred by limitation whichwas filed after a delay of 145 days. The reasons assigned bythe Assessee for the delay viz., Medical Ailments of theAssessee were not found to be sufficient by the learned Tribunalas they were not supported by the Doctor's Certificate and theadmission certificate produced was only for three days. 2. The relevant portion of the order passed by the Tribunal dated 5.12.2017 is quoted below for ready reference:-"4. In the present case, the assessee justifiedthe delay only with reference to the Affidavit bythe assessee stating that the assessee wassuffering from Hypertension, Rhemotoid Arthritisand other problems and he was admitted in VijayaHospital on 3.3.2016 and discharged on 5.3.2016 asper Vijay Medical & Educational Trust's dischargesummary (at page 41 of file) baring IPNo.2347/2016, Bed No.309, dated Nil. This reasonadvanced by the assessee is not supported byDoctors' Certificate and the admission certificatewas only 3 days i.e., from 3.3.2016 to 5.3.2016.Therefore, I am of the opinion that this kind ofdelay does not warrant condonation, since theassessee has not shown any valid proof forundergoing treatment on the advice of doctor infiling theappeal belatedly145days.Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assesseestands dismissed as un-admitted."3. The learned counsel appearing for the Revenue however,supported the impugned order. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for theparties and upon perusal of the reasons stated in the impugnedorder, we are satisfied that the learned Tribunal could havetaken sympathetic view of the matter and decided the Appealproceedings on merits. There was a delay of 8 days in filingthe Appeal before the Commissioner of Income (Tax) and 145 daysin filing the Appeal before the Tribunal. Both the AppellateForums have failed to consider the case of the Assessee onmerits and decide his Appeal with regard to the Cash Creditentries of which disallowance was made by the AssessingAuthority. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for theparties and upon perusal of the reasons stated in the impugnedorder, we are satisfied that the learned Tribunal could havetaken sympathetic view of the matter and decided the Appealproceedings on merits. There was a delay of 8 days in filingthe Appeal before the Commissioner of Income (Tax) and 145 daysin filing the Appeal before the Tribunal. Both the AppellateForums have failed to consider the case of the Assessee onmerits and decide his Appeal with regard to the Cash Creditentries of which disallowance was made by the AssessingAuthority. 5. The learned counsel for the Assessee submitted before usthat as against the demand of Rs.7,27,210/-, a substantialamount viz., Rs.4,75,000/- stands paid by the Assessee duringthe period from May 2010 to June 2018 as per the detailsfurnished in the Memorandum of Appeal filed by the Assessee andeven after filing of the present Appeal, further payments havebeen made and in total, around Rs.7,00,000 has been paid. 6. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the matterdeserves to be remitted back to the Tribunal for deciding theAppeal on merits. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filingthe said Appeal and we request the learned Tribunal to decidethe Appeal on merits and in accordance with law within a periodof 6 months from today, after providing a reasonable opportunityof hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee shall appear beforethe Tribunal in the first instance on 15.5.2019. The Tax CaseAppeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. The connectedmiscellaneous petition is closed. -s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar ssk. 1. The Income Tax Officer, Salary Ward-VI(2), Chennai. 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "SMC", C-Branch, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)15 121, Mahathma Gandhi Road Chennai 34. 4. The Income Tax officer Salary Ward VI(2) Chennai. +2 Ccs to Waraon & Sairams, sr 38072.+1 CC to Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate sr 38779. JP(CO)SP(07/05/2019) TCA No.660 of 2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/