2017 (3) TMI 667

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 10.01.2014 but the appeal was ultimately filed on 15.10.2015 resulting in a delay of 218 days. The assessee-company filed an affidavit seeking condonation of delay, duly signed by the Whole-time Director of the Company, and also a petition was filed under section 253(5) of the Act. The case of the assessee is that it took 02 months to receive the order of the CIT(A) but the said order was served upon one person by name B. Srinivas, an employee of M/s. Suresh Productions P. Ltd., who does not know about the assessee-company since the Company has become dormant for many years. In the affidavit it was stated that the assessee-company was incorporated in the F.Y. 2005-06 and A.Y. 2008-09 is the first year of business wherein the assessee incu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....]. 2.2. Since the Revenue has not filed any material on those two aspects, the case was adjourned from time to time to enable the D.R. to obtain the material from the A.O. Finally, a letter dated 30th August, 2016, addressed to the Senior Authorised Representative, by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad (though the respondent herein is Asst. Commisisoner of Income Tax, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad) was placed on record wherein it was clarified as under : "Sub : Appellate proceedings in the case of M/s Spirit BPO Services Ltd., Hyderabad - Asst. Year 2008-09 - Submission of report - Reg. Ref: Sr.AR-II, ITAT, A-Bench's letter in F.No: Sr.AR-II/ABench/ Hyd/ITA.No:1577/2016-17 dated 13/07/2016, addressed to DCIT, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....December, 2014 along with the covering letter. 3. I have carefully considered the affidavit as well as the petition seeking condonation of delay. We are of the opinion that there is a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal intime and therefore, we admit the appeal and proceed to dispose of the grounds urged before us. 4. Vide ground Nos. 2 and 3, the assessee contends that the reopening of assessment is bad in law. The relevant grounds are reproduced hereunder : 1. "The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), is against law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without appreciating the fact that there was no failure on the part of the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the reasons for reopening of the assessment u/s.147 and find no infirmity in the action of the A.O. Hence, these grounds are dismissed." 6. Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The case of the assessee is that no reasons were recorded by the A.O. to reopen the assessment apart from the fact that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts and thus the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O. is without any tangible material. 7. The Ld. D.R. placed before us a copy of letter dated 30th August, 2016 of the DCIT, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad wherein it was admitted that no reasons were recorded in the order sheet. 8. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I am of the v....