Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Rama Handicrafts , Jaipur vs Assessee

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal15 January 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The delay in filing the appeal is condoned where the cause of the delay is the mistake of the assessee's counsel, not any fault of the assessee, applying the principle that substantial justice is to be preferred over technical considerations and that a party should not suffer for the inadvertence of its advocate. Where the issue raised in the appeal is covered by a decision of the Supreme Court, the ground is to be set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1 ITA No. 651/JP/2012 M/s. Rama Handicrafts vs. ACIT, Circle- 4 Jaipur

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

(BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. MEENA)

ITA No. 651/JP/2012 Assessment year: 2001-02 PAN : AACFR 2488 P

M/s. Rama Handicrafts vs. The ACIT Nahargarh Road Circle- 4 Jaipur Jaipur (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri S.L Poddar, Advocate Department by: Smt. Neena Jeph , JCIT , Sr. DR

Date of Hearing: .... 17-11-2014 Date of Pronouncement: 15-01-2015

ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld.

CIT(A)-II, Jaipur dated 01-12-2010 wherein the assessee has raised

following ground in its appeal.

''Under the facts and circumstances of the case ld.

CIT(A) has erred in not allowing deduction u/s 80HHC of the I.T. Act , 1961 in spite of the clear direction of Hon'ble ITAT on DEPB receipts/ premium of Rs. 43,29,264/-'' 2 ITA No. 651/JP/2012 M/s. Rama Handicrafts vs. ACIT, Circle- 4 Jaipur

2.1 The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset contended that appeal of

the assessee is filed late by 498 days and an application for condonation of

delay to this effect has been filed with following pleadings of the assessee.

(i) The relevant appeal papers were handed over in time to

the ld. counsel for the assessee who by mistake left in the income tax

office.

(ii) Subsequently on 1st July, 2012 when the ld. counsel for

the assessee was in the income tax office then one clerk of income tax

office handed over the papers misplaced by him and the appeal was

filed immediately on 2-07-2012.

(iii) The delay is attributable to the mistake of the ld. Counsel

for the assessee which has been accepted by way of filing of a sworn

affidavit which is also available on record.

(iv) The issue in appeal is purely legal one already

adjudicated by Hon'ble Supreme Court and it is to be decided in the

light of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment.

(v) The assessee should not be put to loss due to

inadvertence of the Advocate which is accepted by him.

2.2 The ld. AR of the assessee relied on the Supreme Court judgment in

the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 3 ITA No. 651/JP/2012 M/s. Rama Handicrafts vs. ACIT, Circle- 4 Jaipur

471 (SC) holding that when substantial justice and technical considerations

are pitted against each other the cause of substantial justice should prevail.

Non-condonation of delay will cause a irreparable damage to the assessee

inasmuch as the orders of the lower authorities which is not in conformity

with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will become final.

2.3 The ld. DR is heard on condonation and merits.

2.4 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials

available on record. There is no fault attributable to the assessee which is

admitted by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. It is a trite law that for the

mistake on the part of the Counsel the assessee should not be put to loss.

Thus keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and Hon'ble

Supreme Court judgement in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs.

Mst. Katiji and Others (supra), the delay in the filing the appeal is condoned.

2.5 Apropos assessee's ground the same is covered by the judgment of

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Topman Exports vs. CIT , 342 ITR 49.

In view thereof, the ground of the assessee is set aside and restored back to

the file of the AO to decide the same afresh in accordance with law and by

providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4 ITA No. 651/JP/2012

M/s. Rama Handicrafts vs. ACIT, Circle- 4 Jaipur

3.0 In the result, the appeal of the is assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 15/01/2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. MEENA) (R.P. TOLANI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Jaipur Dated: 15th JAN 2015 *Mishra Copy forwarded to:- 1.M/s. Rama Handicrafts, Jaipur 2. The ACIT, Circle- 4 Jaipur 3. The ld. CIT(A) 4. The ld. CIT By Order 5..The ld. DR 6.The Guard File (IT No. 651/JP/2012)

AR ITAT, Jaipur

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free