The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 4588 (Jp-Trib) : (2021) 186 ITD 0493

IN THE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH

VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. & VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M.

Vijayeta Buildcon (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

I.T.A. No. 980/JP/2018

27 October, 2020

In favour of assessee.

Assessee by: S.R. Sharma, CA & Rajnikant Bhatra, CA

Revenue by: B.K. Gupta, CIT

ORDER

Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals)-4, Jaipur dated 30-8-2016 wherein the assessee has challenged the action of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in confirming the addition of Rs. 42,50,000 made by the assessing officer under section 40A(3) of the Act pertaining to assessment year 2007-08.

2. At the outset, it is noted that there has been a delay in filing the present appeal by 654 days. In its petition for condonation of delay, the assessee company has submitted that the assessment under section 153A read with 143(3) was completed on 25-3-2015 by ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur against which the assessee moved an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on 17-4-2015. Thereafter, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) passed the order on 30-8-2016 which was served on the assessee company on 5-9-2016. It was further submitted that there was a change in management of the assessee company in year 2014 wherein Shri Hari Mohan Dangayach and Smt. Kamlesh Dangayach transferred their entire shareholding to Shri Akshya Gupta and Mrs. Anju Gupta. It was further submitted that as per the mutual understanding between the old and new management, it was decided that the subject tax matter, which pertains to year prior to transfer of ownership and management of the assessee company, would be handled by the erstwhile management group. It was further submitted that Shri Jagdish Narain Khandelwal an employee of the erstwhile management who looks after the income tax matters collected the duly filled Form No. 36 and other papers from the Counsel and he handed over the said papers to his subordinate accountant Shri Naveli Sharan Mittal to get it signed from new management. However, Shri Naveli Sharan Mittal after collecting the papers misplaced the same somewhere in bunch of papers and forgot all about the same. The matter came to notice of the current management on 11-7-2018 when an enquiry was made by the assessing officer regarding payment of outstanding demand and thereafter, the papers were searched including the original appellate order and dully filled up Form 36 and appeal was thereafter filed before the Tribunal. In support, the affidavits of outgoing Director Shri Hari Mohan Dangayach and present director Shri Akshay gupta along with affidavits of Shri Jagdish Narain Khandelwal and Shri Naveli Sharan Mittal were placed on record. It was accordingly submitted that the assessee company was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed period due to change of management and given that there is no mala fide involved in delayed filing of the appeal, in the interest of justice, the delay in filing may be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for adjudication on merits. In support, reliance was placed on the Coordinate Bench decision in case of Shri Ram Bharose Sharma v. ITO (ITA No. 1066/JP/2016, dated 14-6-2018) wherein delay of 636 days was condoned. Further, reliance was placed on the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in case of Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT (Civil Appeal Nos. 6671-6676 of 2010, dated 7-11-2019) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 7747 (SC) wherein delay in filing appeal by 1754 was condoned.

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT