2021 (1) TMI 736 - AT - Income Tax

Application for condonation of delay filed at belated stage - HELD THAT - As relying on STATE OF M.P. AND ANR. VERSUS PRADEEP KUMAR AND ANR. 2000 (9) TMI 1042 - SUPREME COURT application for condonation of delay filed in appeal at later stage is also maintainable and entertainable. Let us to proceed on merits of the application for condonation of delay. Delay of 221 days in filing of the appeal - Assessee specifically averred that her counsel forwarded a copy of the same to the Assessee immediately but it was received by the Assessee's mother-in-law who is aged about 65 years and somehow due to old age ailments, she misplaced the said order and skipped to inform the Assessee and therefore the Assessee did not receive the said order - immediately after getting the knowledge qua passing of order against the Assessee, the Assessee acted diligently and filed the appeal with delay of 221 days which occurred unintentionally and bonafidely. The explanation of the Assessee is supported by her affidavit and the department did not expressly refute the stand taken by the Assessee. The delay can be explained as bonafide mistake if any occurred due to the non-communication of the impugned order upon the Assessee therefore there seems to be no malafide intention for causing delay but the same prima facie appears to be bonafide and reasonable, hence in our considered opinion the Assessee has shown the sufficient cause for delay and therefore the delay of 221 days in filing of the appeal deserves to be condoned. Even the Assessee intends to get settled the dispute through 'the VSV Scheme' and already initiated the process and willing to pay the relevant taxes. It is the public policy of nation that litigations must come to an end. Hence considering the peculiar facts and circumstances collectively, we are inclined to admit the appeal by condoning the delay of 221 days in filing of the appeal, consequently the delay stands condoned.

Summary

Issues:
- Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Analysis:
The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Visakhapatnam addressed the issue of condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The Assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay due to a delay of 221 days in filing the appeal. The Tribunal decided to adjudicate first on the application for condonation of delay before proceeding with the appeal.

The Tribunal referred to the case law of State Of M.P. And Anr vs. Pradeep Kumar And Anr, where it was held that the deficiency of not filing an application for condonation of delay along with the appeal is a curable defect. Following this dictum, the Tribunal found that the application for condonation of delay filed at a later stage is maintainable and entertainable.

The Assessee provided reasons for the delay, stating that the order was received by the Assessee's mother-in-law due to old age ailments and was subsequently misplaced. Upon learning about the order, the Assessee diligently pursued the appeal process. The Assessee also initiated the process for settling the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Tribunal considered the conduct of the parties, citing the need to advance substantial justice and the elasticity of the expression "sufficient cause" in the Limitation Act.

The Tribunal emphasized the duty of the Courts to adjudicate bonafide disputes and noted that the period of delay is not relevant for condonation. In this case, the Assessee's explanation was supported by an affidavit, and the department did not refute the Assessee's stand. The Tribunal found the delay to be unintentional and bonafide, with no malafide intention. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, the Tribunal admitted the appeal by condoning the delay of 221 days.

The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay and directed the Registry to post the appeal for hearing. The decision was pronounced in open Court on January 8th, 2021.