TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 548
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this case is a partnership firm having its office at Coonoor, Ooty, Nilgiris. The assessee-firm has filed its return of income for a loss of Rs. 21,72,514/-. On perusal of the assessment records, the Commissioner of Income Tax held that the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue and revised the assessment order under Section 263. The Commissioner of Income Tax has set aside the subject assessment order and remitted back the file to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh assessment order after examining the specific observation and direction made by the Commissioner of Income Tax in his revision order. It is against the said revision order that the assessee has come in appeal before us. 3. There is a delay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ervations directing the assessing officer to pass the order accordingly. The said order of the CIT was served on the appellant on 09.04.2012. The appeal against the said order lies before the Tribunal within 60 days thereon. The appeal was actually filed after a delay of 567 days as per the defect notice issued by the Registry. 6. I submit that the order was received in our office by our accountant Mr. J. Devaraj, who is incharge of receiving tapals from various governmental departments and he is also in charge of Income Tax matters at our Coonoor office. Since he had misplaced the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax passed U/s.263 and the same was irretrievably lost, the appellant was not aware of the said order to take the advice of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the revision order and thereafter immediately filed the appeal. 6. We have carefully gone through the reasons explained by the assessee for the delay caused in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has stated that its Accountant Mr. J. Devaraj is in-charge of tapals and usually receives letters from various government departments. It is the case of the assessee that the said Mr. J. Devaraj had misplaced the revision order and therefore lost it as if irretrievably. But, there is nothing on record to show that the said Mr. J. Devaraj has misplaced any other communication received from any other government department during the said long period of more than 1-1/2 years. It looks as if the impugned revision order alone was misp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urs, filed the appeal at Chennai, by hand, on 27th of December, 2013. This supersonic speed in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is inexplicable. 9. It is a settled law that an assessee usually does not derive any advantage by not filing an appeal in time and the case of condoning the delay in filing an appeal should always be considered very sympathetically and in all fairness. But, it is also equally important to see that the assessee was reasonably diligent in matters relating to filing of appeal. The delay must be reasonably explained. In the present case, the assessee has not explained the reasons for delay in a convincing and satisfactory manner before the Tribunal. When the Tribunal is not at all satisfied on the reasons submitt....