2020 (2) TMI 488 - HC - Income Tax

Condoning of delay of 1305 days - Assessee submits that appellant was pursuing his remedy of rectification of the appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 154 of the Act and that was the reason for the delay - HELD THAT - On due consideration and taking an overall view of the matter, we feel that it would meet the ends of justice if the matter is decided afresh by the Tribunal after giving due opportunity to the appellant to explain the delay in preferring the related appeal. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, no opinion is expressed on merit and all contentions are kept open.

Summary

Issues: Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on grounds of being time-barred and dismissal of the condonation application for delay in preferring the appeal.

Analysis:

1. The appellant, in this case, challenged the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune Bench, on the grounds of being time-barred. The Tribunal had dismissed the appeal on the basis of the delay of 1305 days in preferring the appeal, and the condonation application filed by the appellant was also rejected for lack of reasons for the delay.

2. The appellant's counsel argued that the delay was due to pursuing the remedy of rectification of the appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 154 of the Act. It was further explained that the appeal against the rejection of the rectification application was filed within time, but the appeal against the appellate order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on merit was time-barred.

3. The revenue's standing counsel supported the Tribunal's order, stating that the assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. After considering the submissions, the High Court felt that justice would be served by remanding the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision, allowing the appellant an opportunity to explain the delay in preferring the appeal.

4. The High Court set aside the order dated 17.3.2017 and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision in accordance with the law. It was emphasized that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the case, and all contentions were kept open. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, providing a chance for a fresh hearing before the Tribunal.