I.T.A. No. 3100/Mds/2014, (Assessment Year: 2009-2010). Case: S.P. Swaminathan Vs Commissioner of Income Tax-II. ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal)

Case NumberI.T.A. No. 3100/Mds/2014, (Assessment Year: 2009-2010)
CounselFor Appellant: S. Sridhar, Advocate and For Respondents: S. Das Gupta, J.C.I.T.
JudgesA. Mohan Alankamony, Member (A) and Challa Nagendra Prasad, Member (J)
IssueIncome Tax Act
Judgement DateFebruary 20, 2015
CourtITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal)

Order:

Challa Nagendra Prasad, Member (J), (ITAT Chennai 'B' Bench)

  1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Coimbatore dated 25.02.2014 passed under section 263 of the Act.

  2. The appeal is filed with delay of 233 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay stating reasons for delay in filing of appeal. Counsel for the assessee submits that Commissioner of Income Tax issued notice proposing to revise assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 20.04.2011 stating that order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. In the show-cause notice Commissioner of Income Tax proposed to revise the order on five issues namely-

    i) Income from real estate business;

    ii) Difference in bus fare collection

    iii) Advance to M/s. Tejas

    iv) Capital accumulation &

    v) Violation of section 40A(3).

    Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee submitted reply to the show-cause notice. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax by order dated 25.02.2014 cancelled the assessment order with a direction to do assessment afresh taking into account all the relevant facts available on file as well as submissions made by the Authorized Representative. The assessee was under bonafide impression that Assessing Officer would pass consequential order to give effect to the order passed under section 263 by the Commissioner of Income Tax by only dealing with the issues which were considered by the Commissioner of Income Tax in his show-cause notice and order passed under section 263. However, the Assessing Officer issued a questionnaire calling for information on various issues even the issues other than those proposed and directed by the Commissioner of Income Tax in his order under section 263. The counsel submits that even the issues which were already concluded in the original assessment, the Assessing Officer is now racking up and calling for information. In view of this counsel submits that assessee was advised to file an appeal against the order passed under section 263 of the Act. Since the Assessing Officer is going beyond the show-cause notice and the issues in the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax passed under section 263 of the Act, the assessee filed this appeal with delay of 233 days. Therefore, the delay in filing of appeal is not intentional and due to the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Thus, counsel...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT