AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 465
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....month of February, 2018 the entire record of the office of the assessee was shifted out and was stored at a separate location. In this process, the impugned order got misplaced and was traced only on 5th December, 2018 when one Mr. Anwar Ahmad Khan was going through the office record has located and found the said order. The learned counsel has submitted that immediately after tracing the impugned order, the assessee took step to file the present appeal and consulted its Advocate through the management of the society and finally the appeal was filed on 18th March, 2018. There is a delay of 271 days in filing these appeals. However, the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate but due to unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the assessee as the school premises was taken over by the board for conducting the board examination in the month of February, 2018. He has further pointed out that after the board examination there was summer vacations and therefore, the impugned order traced out only in the month of December, 2018. Hence, the learned AR has pleaded the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and the appeals of the assessee may be heard and decided on merits....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to each other, cause of substantial justice has to be preferred and justice oriented approach has to be taken while deciding the condonation of delay. 6. In the case in hand, the assessee has explained the reasons which are not found as mala fide or a devise to cover up any ulterior purpose. Further by filing appeals belatedly, assessee would not get any benefit out of it such as to achieve any ulterior purpose. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the reasons / cause explained by the assessee, I am satisfied that the assessee has a sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. Hence, in the interest of justice, the delay of 271 days in filing these appeals is condoned. 7. The assessee has raised common grounds in these appeals. The grounds raised for the assessment year 2008-09 are as under:- BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), dismissing the appeal of the assessee and upholding the order u/s 272A(2)(k)/274 levying penalty for Rs. 1,57,170/- is both bad in law as well as on facts and is liable to be quashed being made without observing the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itted that the AO initiated the penalty proceedings against the wrong person who is not responsible for the payment or deduction of TDS. Thus, the penalty proceedings initiated against a wrong person and impugned order passed by the AO against a wrong person is void ab initio. 9. The learned AR has referred to the memorandum of association at page 6 to 29 of the paper book and submitted that as per the memorandum of association, the Manager of the college is responsible for all the receipt of grant, contribution, administration control and finance of the school within the provision of the budget. He is also authority to sanction payment of salary, increments and dues to the employees of the school. Thus, the AO without verifying who is the responsible and Principal Officer as per section 204 of the Income Tax Act has initiated and levied the penalty against the person who is not responsible for payment and deduction of TDS in terms of Section 204 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, the learned AR has submitted that the additional evidence sought to be produced by the assessee in support of the fact that the Principal of the school is not responsible officer against whom the penalty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng was accordingly adjourned on 17.02.2017 though, no notice was issued by the CIT(A) for the said date of hearing. Since the assessee did not attend the hearing on 10.09.2017, the CIT(A) issued notice on 10.11.2017 for the hearing on 29.11.2017 and thereafter a further notice issued on 8.12.2017 for the hearing on 21.12.2017. There is no attendance on behalf of the assessee on these two hearings and consequently the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing a summary order without discussing the facts or grounds raised by the assessee. The assessee has submitted that these two notices as alleged by the CIT(A) were not received by the assessee however, since the appeals of the assessee were dismissed summarily by the CIT(A) without passing a speaking order therefore, the impugned orders passed by the CIT(A) are not sustainable in law. The assessee has also raised an additional ground challenging the validity of the initiation of the proceedings for levy of penalty under section u/s 272A(2)(k) as well as the order passed by the AO levying the penalty. The assessee has challenged the validity of the order on the ground that the Principal of the college is not the res....