2014 (3) TMI 930 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay Delay of 39 days Held that - The assessee failed to convince the bench for the delay in filing the appeals belatedly by way of proper explanation/evidence - the law assists those who are vigilant, not those who sleep over their rights - The delay cannot be condoned simply because the assessee s case is hard and calls for sympathy or merely out of benevolence to the party seeking relief In granting the indulgence and condoning the delay, it must be proved beyond the shadow of doubt that the assessee was diligent and was not guilty of negligence, whatsoever - Seekers of justice must come with clean hands - as stated in the affidavit, the reasons advanced by the assessee are not supported by any cogent evidence thus, the condonation of delay cannot be granted Relying upon Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME Court - the assessee is not vigilant and also not explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeals with sufficient and good reasons as well as not shown the delay was due to beyond the control of the assessee - the delay could have been avoided by due care and attention of the assessee Decided against Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay of 30 days in filing appeals before ITAT Hyderabad.
2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee for AY 2002-03 and 2003-04.
3. Condonation of delay in filing appeals.
4. Adjudication on the delay issue.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Delay of 30 days in filing appeals
The appeals by the Assessee were directed against the orders of the CIT(A)-IV for the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04. The Assessee attributed the delay in filing the appeals to the Accountant's oversight, who failed to bring the order to the management's attention due to audit work and subsequent leave. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a diligent explanation for delay, stating that the law assists the vigilant and condonation requires proof of diligence and absence of negligence. The Tribunal found the reasons provided by the Assessee lacking in cogent evidence and declined to condone the delay, highlighting the importance of establishing a sufficient cause beyond the party's control.

Issue 2: Grounds of appeal for AY 2002-03 and 2003-04
For AY 2002-03, the Assessee raised grounds related to non-consideration of foreign exchange earnings for deduction u/s 80HHC and denial of deduction under section 80IB. In AY 2003-04, issues included denial of deduction under section 80IB and alleged miscalculation of 80HHC deduction. The CIT(A) decisions were challenged on various legal grounds, highlighting discrepancies in the treatment of deductions and income calculations.

Issue 3: Condonation of delay in filing appeals
The Assessee sought condonation of the 30-day delay in filing the appeals, attributing it to the Accountant's inadvertence. However, the Tribunal found the reasons insufficient and emphasized the need for a diligent and valid cause beyond the Assessee's control. Citing the principles outlined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal underscored the importance of substantial justice over technical considerations and the need for a rational approach in condoning delays.

Issue 4: Adjudication on the delay issue
After careful consideration, the Tribunal declined to condone the delay in filing the appeals, citing the Assessee's lack of diligence and failure to provide substantial evidence for the delay. The Tribunal stressed the importance of adhering to limitation provisions and the need for parties to approach legal matters with due care and attention. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed due to the uncondoned delay, and the grounds raised by the Assessee were not addressed on merits.

In conclusion, the judgment by the ITAT Hyderabad emphasized the significance of timely filing, diligence, and valid reasons for condonation of delays in legal proceedings, while also addressing the substantive legal issues raised by the Assessee in the appeals for the respective assessment years.