TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (11) TMI 917
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y, some documents evidencing business transactions of the assessee were found. Based on the documents found in the survey, the A.O. has reopened the assessment by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act and after following the due procedure, an assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) r/w. s. 147 of the Act for the Assessment Years 1999-96 to 1997-98 and s. 144 r/w s. 147 of the Act for the Assessment Years 1998-99 to 2002-03. Aggrieved by these assessment orders, the assessee filed an appeal on 21.09.2012 before the CIT(A) along with the delay condonation petition for 8½ years. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by rejecting the delay condonation petition filed by him vide order dated 19.12.2013. 5. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter before the Tribunal. The Hon'ble ITAT 'A' Bench, Chennai in ITA Nos. 343, 2904, 2905, 2906, 2907, 2908, 2909 & 2910/Mds/2014 dated 18.03.2015 has set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) dated 19.12.2013 and remitted the issue of delay condonation to the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 18.03.2015. 6. In compliance with the directions by the Hon'ble ITAT, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring from Blood Pressure, Chronic diabetics for which he was taking ayurvedic treatment at Govt. Hospital, Tuticorin. Further vide letter dated, 17-5-2017 he stated that he was living at the houses of his friends and relatives at Tirupur and Alwarthirunagari during the period under treatment for the period from 26-01-2002 to 28-10-2010." 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has considered the remand report given by the A.O. and passed the detailed order and also rejected the condonation of delay, which reads as under: "The assessment orders for all the eight years from assessment year 1995-96 to 2002-03 were trusted. The details regarding filing of return, appearance of the appellant and the authorised representative, issue of notices u/s. 148/142(1)/143(2), the date of orders and the total income assessed etc., for sake of clarity are given in the following table: Asst. Year Notice u/s 143(2)/ 142(1) Original return of income Return of income in response to notice u/s 148 Date of hearing Attendance of appellant and income (in authorised representative Assessed income (in lakhs) Date of order 1995-96 12.03.2003 Filed Filed on 19.03.03 Yes 8.84 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....response to the findings made during the course of survey on 11.07.2001, several instances of concealment of income were detected and therefore, notices u/s. 148 were issued for all the eight assessment years in the month of February 2003. In response to these notices, the appellant chose to file the Income Tax return in respect of only three assessment years i.e. 1995-96, 1996-97 a 1997-98. He, however, chose not to file any Income Tax return in respect of the other five assessment years i.e. assessment years 1998-99 to 2002-03. It can also been seen that the appellant himself along with his Chartered Accountant appeared before the Assessing Officer (sic).03.2003, 06.01.2004 and 26.02.2004 for the assessment proceedings for three assessment years 1995-96, 1996-97 & 1997-98. He, however, chose not to respond to the notices u/s. 148 and 142(1) in respect of five assessment years i.e. assessment years 1998-99 to 2002-03, it is very much clear from this factual background that the appellant was fully aware of the nature of concealment which was detected in his presence on 11.07.2001. He was also fully aware of the notices issued u/s. 148/142(1) in 2003 and also due to the fact that he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... location of the Government hospital. 6.5. Dr. Muralidharan, BAMS, at Government hospital, Tuticorin has stated that he had been giving ayurvedic treatment to the appellant from 20.01.2002 to 28.08.2010 as outpatient. In support of which Dr. Muralidharan, BAMS, has submitted the extract of outpatient register and copy of prescriptions for having given treatment to the appellant, it is, therefore, clear that the appellant was under treatment from January 2002 and was available at his residence atleast up to March 2004, which is the appellant has, denied in his averment at point No. 1. In the letter dated 05.04.2017, the appellant has submitted that he had led an isolated life outside due to mental depression and financial crisis and during this period he was living at the house of his friends and relatives at Thiruppur and Alwarthirunagiri. It is also clear from the sworn statement of Dr. Muralidharan, BAMS, that he was attending ayurvedic treatment at the Government hospital at Tuticorin. The places like Thiruppur and Alwarthirunagiri are far away from Tuticorin. The appellant had been coming for such treatment from a far-off places to take ayurvedic treatment at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ackground documents as discussed above, it is clear that the appellant has not been able to prove with any documentary evidence that he was prevented by any sufficient cause to explain the delay in filing the appeals. The appellant was not only negligent but had complete disregard to the law which led to a delay of 8 ½ years. 6.7. In short he has failed to prove that there were reasons beyond his control which prevented him from filing the appeal within the statutory time allowed to him. The story which has been given in his affidavit and the result of investigation conducted by the Assessing Officer does not instill confidence in the truthfulness of his story, in my considered view, he was not prevented by sufficient reasonable cause in filing the appeals for eight assessment years within the statutory time allowed to him, as he has failed to explain the abnormal delay of about 8 Vi years and the reasons given by him appear to be unreliable and false. In view of this, the delay in filing of appeal cannot be condoned. The appeal is dismissed in-limine." 8. On being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The counsel for the assessee has submi....