2015 (9) TMI 968

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7-08. 2. The affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion sets out the chronological events leading to the reason for delay in filing the present appeal as under: "i. I say that I have perused all the records and proceedings of the Appellant available in my office and I am conversant with the same. ii. I say that the sequence of the events noticed by me based on the records are as under. iii. The order of the ITAT "J" Bench, ITA No.5342/M/2011 dated 08.06.2012 (impugned order) was received by the CIT22, Mumbai on 10.07.2012. iv. The impugned order was sent to the office of the Addl.CIT/DCIT on 11.07.2012. v. The scrutiny report was sent to office of the CIT/Addl.CIT on 07.08.2012, resubmitted ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on file so as to maintain consistency in the action of the Revenue. 4. On the other hand, Mr.Jasani, learned Counsel for the Assessee strongly opposes the condonation application and places reliance upon the decision of this Court in the case "Somerset Place Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer Vs. ITO; (Notice of Motion NO.1004 of 2014 in Income Tax Appeal (Lodg) No.874 of 2014) " to contend that where a conscious decision was taken not to file an appeal, then it is not open to the applicant to assail the order on the ground of a subsequent decision. It is further submitted by Mr.Jasani that in the impugned order, the Tribunal while dismissing the Revenue's appeal had relied upon its own decision in the case "Shr....