2010 (2) TMI 828 - AT - Income Tax

Delay in filing appeal - appeal delayed by 1695 days - mistake of assessee s staff inadvertently filed the appeal in the wrong office - Held that - explanation offered by the assessee Bank is not acceptable on facts, assessee has failed to explain reasonable cause for inordinate delay in filing the present appeal as per provisions of section 253(2) of the I.T. Act. assessee s appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Delay of 1695 days in filing the appeal challenging the order passed under section 201(1) r.w.s 192 of the I.T. Act.
- Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned by the Appellate Tribunal.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the assessee bank challenging the order passed under section 201(1) r.w.s 192 of the I.T. Act, which raised a demand for the A.Y. 2000-01. The delay in filing the appeal was 1695 days, well beyond the statutory limit of 60 days from the date of receipt of the order. The assessee attributed the delay to mistakenly filing the appeal in the wrong office, which was not accepted by the Tribunal due to lack of convincing explanation and failure to pay the requisite Tribunal fees at the time of filing the appeal.

2. The assessee contended that the delay was inadvertent, citing the acknowledgment on the Form No. 36 filed in the wrong office. However, the Tribunal found the explanation unconvincing, especially since the appeal fee was paid much later on 12.12.2006. Despite relying on various precedents, the Tribunal held that the assessee failed to provide a reasonable cause for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal, as required under section 253(2) of the I.T. Act.

3. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden was on the assessee to explain the delay adequately, which was not met in this case. The Tribunal noted the lack of further inquiry by the assessee or its representatives after the alleged mistake in filing the appeal. Additionally, the Tribunal highlighted the failure to produce the original stamp of the office where the appeal was mistakenly filed, further weakening the assessee's case for condonation of delay.

4. Despite the assessee's reliance on legal precedents, the Tribunal found that the facts of those cases were not comparable to the current situation, where the explanation for the delay was deemed implausible. The Tribunal, applying the rule of human probability, concluded that the assessee's justification for the delay was not acceptable, leading to the dismissal of the appeal challenging the order passed under section 201(1) r.w.s 192 of the I.T. Act for the A.Y. 2000-01.

5. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal declined to condone the inordinate delay of 1695 days in filing the appeal, ultimately dismissing the assessee's appeal challenging the impugned order of the Ld CIT(A) dated 15.3.2002. The order was pronounced on 22.2.2010, upholding the decision to not condone the delay in filing the appeal.