2017 (5) TMI 1403 - HC - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - Held that - None of reasons can justify the extraordinary delay of 910 days in re-filing the appeal. After the appeal was initially filed on 20th August, 2014, the Department actually forgot about it entirely. It is not possible to accept that no one in the Department followed up on the filing of appeals and allowed a period of over two-and-a-half years to elapse before the appeal could be re-filed. The Department has a cell in the High Court which is under the supervision of a Deputy CIT. He ought to be keeping track of the filing of appeals and should be able to know if any appeal entrusted to the panel counsel for filing has not been listed even once before the Court for a long time. The Court is not convinced by the reasons given for the delay of 910 days in re-filing the appeal. The application for condonation of delay is dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in re-filing appeal under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961

Analysis:
1. The application sought condonation of a significant delay of 910 days in re-filing the appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was directed against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2. The reasons provided for the delay included the initial filing of the appeal in August 2014, objections raised by the Registry leading to the appeal being returned to the Senior Standing Counsel, subsequent lack of communication regarding defects in the filing, and the failure to follow up on the appeal's status. The Applicant had to restructure the entire appeal, including addressing illegible annexures.

3. The Court noted that none of the reasons presented justified the extraordinary delay. It was observed that the Department had forgotten about the appeal entirely after the initial filing, allowing over two-and-a-half years to pass before re-filing. The Court highlighted the role of the Deputy CIT in tracking appeal filings and emphasized the lack of follow-up within the Department.

4. Ultimately, the Court was unconvinced by the explanations provided for the 910-day delay in re-filing the appeal. The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeal itself (ITA No. 246 of 2017).

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the judgment, outlining the circumstances leading to the delay, the Court's observations, and the final decision to dismiss the application and appeal.