TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 1543
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was submitted by ld. AR of assessee that in the present case, return of income was filed by the assessee which was assessed by the AO as per assessment order dated 10.03.2014 and the assessment order was served on the assessee on 13.03.2014. Thereafter, the assessee moved an application for revision u/s. 264 of IT Act before the CIT. It is also submitted that an application for withdrawal of application filed u/s. 264 of IT Act was submitted before the CIT on 05.02.2015 and thereafter on 06.02.2015, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT (A) and subsequently on 09.02.2015, the ld. CIT has dismissed the application of assessee u/s. 264 as withdrawn. Thereafter he submitted that in the impugned order, it was held by CIT (A) that since t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....use of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. 5. Regarding the reasons for delay, he submitted that the assessee had earlier preferred an alternative remedy available and therefore, there was sufficient and reasonable cause for delay in filing appeal before the CIT (A). In this regard, he placed reliance on following judicial pronouncements. a) CIT Vs. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadar and Others, 153 ITR 596 (Madras) b) CIT Vs. Sharma and Company, 153 ITR 605(Raj) c) J.M. Bhasali and Others Vs. The State of Madras, 21 STC 411(Madras) He submitted that the delay in filing appeal should be condoned and matter should be restored back to the file of CIT (A) for decision on merit because he has not made decision o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ained by the assessee and same has to be condoned in the facts of the present case. Hence we condone the delay in filing appeal before the CIT (A) and restore the matter back to the file of CIT (A) for decision on merit of the appeal of the assessee. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page. ============= Document 1 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is opposed to the facts of the case and law applicable to it. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal as not maintainable by not condoning the delay in filing the appeal, despite the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... erred in ignoring the position of law that the appellant waived its right to file appeal to facilitate the Hon'ble Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax to invoke the powers conferred on him under the provisions of section 264 of the act and by filing an appeal later, the appellant preferred to exercise its right to appeal and thereby withdrew the petition U/s.264 of the act. Document 2 8. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the fact that, the appellant exercised its right to file appeal which it had voluntarily waived originally and filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), thereafter filed a letter withdrawing the petition U/s.264 of the act and consequen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c Industries Vs. Income Tax Officer, - Ward II(7), Coimbatore ignoring the fact that the transaction involved in the said case is totally different from that of the appellant and the facts being dissimilar, the ratio could not have been applied. Document 3 v) The learned Assessing Officer erred in ignoring the fact that, the transaction in question is of sale of shares which is a matter reported to the registrar of companies and recorded in the books of the company and unless the transaction is proved as not occurred, the law does not provide for ignoring the profit/loss of the transaction. vi) The learned Assessing Officer erred in not appreciating the fact that, the shares were originally acquired in the....