2019 (3) TMI 730 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - appeal filled u/s 147/143(3) and 271(1))(c) before the CIT(A) with the delay - reasonable cause for delay - HELD THAT - As regards the delay of 7 months and 13 days in filing the appeal against the order of the AO u/s 147/143(3), an application seeking condonation of the said delay was filed by the assessee stating that he was ill for a prolonged period due to sudden demise of his mother which made him confused and hopeless. This reason given by the assessee was duly supported by a medical certificate indicating that the assessee was disturbed by the death of his mother which had caused distress. It is well settled that the term sufficient causes is to be construed liberally in order to advance the cause of substantial justice and not strictly to defeat the purpose. When the reason of prolonged illness given by the assessee for the delay of 7 months and 13 days in filing his appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was duly supported by medical certificate indicating the disturbance caused to the assessee by the death of his mother as well as his distress, we are of the view that it constituted a sufficient cause and the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have condoned the said delay. In that view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 29.06.2016 and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee against the order passed by the AO u/s 147/143(3) on merit after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. Rectification order of the AO u/s 154 - no proper and sufficient opportunity was given to assessee - HELD THAT - The issue involved therein relating to charging of interest is consequential to the issue involved in the appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the AO u/s 147/143(3). The main grievance of the assessee on this issue is that no proper and sufficient opportunity was given to him either by the AO or by the CIT(A) before making the rectification on the issue of interest. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on 21.06.2016 and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard.

Summary

Issues:
- Delay in filing appeals before the Tribunal
- Addition to total income on account of unexplained deposits
- Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) due to delay in filing
- Penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c)
- Rectification order passed by AO under section 154
- Condonation of delay in filing appeals

Delay in filing appeals before the Tribunal:
The assessee filed three appeals involving one assessment year against separate orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Burdwan. The delay of 345 days in filing the appeals was condoned due to valid reasons provided by the assessee, supported by a medical certificate indicating distress caused by personal circumstances. The Tribunal found the reasons sufficient and decided to hear the appeals on merit.

Addition to total income on account of unexplained deposits:
The AO determined the total income of the assessee for A.Y. 2005-06 at ?12,51,537 after adding ?11,40,061 on account of unexplained deposits in the bank account. The assessee appealed against this order, which was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 7 months and 13 days in filing the appeal. The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for proper disposal after condoning the delay.

Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) due to delay in filing:
The penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated by the AO, and a penalty of ?3,80,574 was imposed. The assessee's appeal against this penalty was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 15 days in filing the appeal. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A) order, remitting the matter back for fresh consideration after condoning the delay.

Penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c):
The penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) was challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A). The delay in filing the appeal was condoned by the Tribunal, and the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for proper disposal after giving the assessee a sufficient opportunity.

Rectification order passed by AO under section 154:
The AO rectified the interest calculation in the assessment order under section 154. The assessee appealed against this rectification, claiming insufficient opportunity was given. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, but the Tribunal remitted the matter back for fresh consideration after ensuring proper opportunity for the assessee.

Condonation of delay in filing appeals:
The Tribunal, after thorough analysis, set aside the CIT(A) orders in all three appeals, allowing them for statistical purposes. The Tribunal emphasized the need to consider sufficient causes liberally to advance substantial justice and remitted the matters back to the CIT(A) for proper disposal after condoning the delays.