vide letter dated 22.7.1998 asked the assessee to submit supporting evidence of filing the appeal before the Tribunal, which was followed by another reminder, dated 31.7.1998 issued to the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee vide its letter dated 24.8.1998 mentioned that assessee filed the appeal on 24.8.1998 for the assessment years 1986-87, 1990-91 to 1992-93 before the Tribunal and requested to keep the penalty proceedings in abeyance till the decision of the Tribunal. In such a situation, we are not in agreement with the argument of the assessee that it is barred by limitation because firstly the period of six months from the end of the month in which CIT(A)’s order was received, still time was there and secondly, the matter was got delayed by the assessee himself with a request that the penalty proceedings may be kept in abeyance in such a situation, now the Assessing Officer cannot blame the department, it is pertinent to mention here that the Tribunal dismissed the appeal the assessee and delay was also not condoned. It is also a fact that as on 24.8.1998 the appeal against the order of the learned CIT(A) was pending before the Tribunal. Therefore, we have not found any merit in the contention of the assessee. The conclusion of the learned CIT(A) is upheld.”
