TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 446
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court. The Hon'ble High Court while deciding assessee's appeal in ITA no.407/2016, vide order dated 19th December 2018, set aside the order passed by the Tribunal and restored back the issue of condonation of delay for reconsideration with liberty to the assessee to file additional affidavit explaining the cause of delay. The observations of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court are as under:- "6 We have perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the assessee before the Tribunal in support of the request for condonation of delay. We do not find that the delay, which was substantial in any case, was properly explained. The relevant facts were not elaborated in such affidavit. In fact of such affidavit, we do not think that the delay in excess of 700 days, caused in filing appeal before the Tribunal, even by adopting liberal standards, can be condoned. However, we cannot loose sight of the contentions of the Counsel for the Assessee that, on the same issue, for the succeeding as well as for the preceding Assessment Year, the Assessee had filed appeal before the Tribunal and that issue being covered by the Judgment of the High Court, such appeals were allowed. Therefore, we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sultant for further action. 5. That the said appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT for AY 2005-06 had to be filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order of the CIT(A), i.e., on or before 03.03.2010. However, the same had been filed by appellant-company on 20.03.2012. 6. Thus there was a delay of 742 days in filing of appeal before the Honorable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 7. That, the said delay of 742 days occurred due to the fact that the office administrator of the Appellate-Company, Shri Nandu Lohikpure who received I the draft appeal memo in 1st 1st week of February, 2010 from our tax consultant for further action, had failed to bring the same to the notice of the management and that the same came to the knowledge of the appellant company during the course of the filing of the appeal before the ITAT for the AY 2007-08. 8. That, in the month of February, 2012 while preparing the appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08, when the tax consultant asked for the copy of the appeal memo filed for AY 05-06 for the purpose of reference since the issues were common, the appellant company was unable to find the filed appeal memo in Form-36 for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y took one-month time after filing appeal for assessment year 2007-08 because consultation regarding the further course of action to be adopted as the appeal was delayed took some time. Further, time was also required for preparation of affidavits for condonation of delay, which were also filed along with the appeal. 15. That, appellant-company have been diligent enough to file appeals in time for earlier and subsequent years. 16. That, the Appellate order dated 17.10.2008 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2004-05 was received by us on 07.11.2008. Hence the last date for filling the appeal before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal was 06.01.2009 and the appeal was filed on 12.12.2008. Thus, the appeal for Assessment Year 200405 is filed within the limitation period of 60 days as prescribed under the provision of law. 17. That, the Appellate order dated 19.12.2011 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2007-08 was received by us on 29.12.2011. Hence, the last date for filling the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was 27.02.2012 and the appeal was filed on 21.02.2012. Thus, the appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08 is filed within t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thout condoning the delay. 6. We have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. As discussed earlier, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has granted liberty to the assessee to file additional affidavit for the purpose of showing better cause for explaining the delay. While doing so, the Hon'ble High Court also took note of the submissions of the assessee that identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee in its own case in earlier assessment year. Further, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has observed that merely because the present appeal was not filed simultaneously with the appeal for the assessment year 2007-08 would not falsify assessee's claim in the additional affidavit. Undisputedly, the issue in dispute has been decided in favour of the assessee in its own case in assessment year 2004-05. Therefore, there cannot be any manner of doubt that the assessee has a very strong case on merit. Thus, keeping in view the averments made in the additional affidavits filed before us and all other surrounding circumstances, including the observations of the High Court while remanding the matter back to the Tribunal, we are of the conside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mum./2008, dated 10th June 2015, the Tribunal, following the decision in assessee's own case as well as the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, has held as under:- "3. We have considered an identical issue in the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2007-08 in ITA no.1170/Mum./12. The relevant discussions made and the decision taken is extracted below:- "17. The assessee has also raised an additional ground of appeal, wherein it is contested that the loss incurred in Nashik unit should not be set off against the Pune unit for computing deduction under section 10B of the Act in respect of Pune unit. The assessee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (325 ITR 102) and CIT v/s Black & Veatch Consulting Pvt. Ltd. (348 ITR 72). We notice that the co-ordinate bench of ITAT in the case of Larsen & Toubro Infotech Ltd. (supra) has taken the view that the deduction u/s 10B is allowable each undertaking wise and hence the loss incurred in one eligible unit should not be set off against the income from other eligible unit. Further, following observations made by the H....