2020 (10) TMI 1090

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in not allowing the claim of depreciation amounting to Rs. 1,09,21,449/- as an application of income." 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. There is delay of 51 days in filing this appeal. Although, no separate application for condonation of delay has been moved by the assessee for seeking condonation of delay. However, the ld AR argued on behalf of the assessee orally submitted before us that the delay in filing the present appeal was unintentional and bonafide and in this respect, factual situation was submitted by the assessee. 4. On the other hand, the ld DR could not rebut the facts submitted by the assessee before us for seeking condo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e court at its will. 6. If we apply the settled principles as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as other courts on the facts of the present case we find that the assessee has explained cause of delay, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we condone the delay of 51 days in filing the present appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 7. In the quantum appeal, the only ground raised by the assessee is with regard to denying claim of depreciation as an application of income towards the income earned by the assesee society. However, since the assessee failed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) and also failed to offer any explanation in respect or ground raised by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-parte order as nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee before Ld. CIT(A). On perusal of the order, we also noticed that initially the appeal was fixed for hearing and was adjourned from time to time on various occasions, but none attended on behalf of the assessee. We noticed that throughout the assessee remained non-cooperative despite availing several opportunities, therefore Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order, thereby taking into consideration, the statement of facts and the material placed on record. 11. In our view, it was the bounded duty of the parties i.e. assessee as well as the Department to appear before the Ld. CIT(A). Since, this was the assessee's appeal, therefore it was all the more important for the assessee to appe....