2017 (4) TMI 1242 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - Held that - There is no thumb rule that the delay in all cases is to be condoned. However, Acceptability of the explanation is the only criteria . Sometimes the delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay of a long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. But when there is reasonable ground to think that the delay was occasioned by the party deliberately to gain time, then the court should lean against acceptance of the explanation. In the facts of the present case, the assessee has woken up from his slumber after a huge delay of 300 days and it has not been shown that all possible steps to file the appeal before the Tribunal were taken and the delay in filing the appeal was not because of any factors which were beyond the control of assessee . Thus we are not at all convinced with the casual and cavalier approach of the assessee in pursuing the legal remedy of approaching the Appellate Tribunal by way of filing appeal.

Summary

Issues:
1. Revision under sec 263 by LID CIT Appeal-15
2. Delay of 300 days in filing appeal before ITAT

Issue 1: Revision under sec 263 by LID CIT Appeal-15
The Appellate Tribunal heard an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax - 15 under sec 263. The order was challenged on the grounds that the LID CIT Appeal-15 erred in passing it without appreciating all the facts correctly and that it amounted to a mere change of opinion. The Ld. CIT found the assessment order erroneous and directed revision to include compensation received by the assessee from M/s Kalpataru Builders as income. The Tribunal analyzed the case, considering the contentions of both parties and relevant legal provisions. It was observed that the delay of 300 days in filing the appeal was not justified as the assessee had contested the assessment order before the AO and appeared before the CIT earlier. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that condonation of delay requires a reasonable cause, which was lacking in this case.

Issue 2: Delay of 300 days in filing appeal before ITAT
The Tribunal addressed the delay of 300 days in filing the appeal before ITAT. The assessee sought condonation citing lack of knowledge of the law by the secretary of the assessee association. However, the Tribunal noted that the assessee had contested the assessment order and appeared before the CIT previously, indicating awareness of legal proceedings. The Tribunal referred to the provisions of the Limitation Act and various judgments to highlight the importance of sufficient cause for condonation. Differentiating the present case from cited judgments, the Tribunal emphasized that each case must be evaluated based on its unique circumstances. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the delay was not justified, and the explanations provided were not satisfactory.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee due to the unexplained delay of 300 days in filing the appeal before ITAT. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of sufficient cause for condonation of delay and emphasized that each case must be evaluated based on its specific facts and circumstances. The decision underscores the need for parties to pursue legal remedies diligently and with valid justifications for any delays.