2021 (8) TMI 106 - AT - Income Tax

Delay in filing appeal - CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on account of delay in filing of the same by more than 03 months - HELD THAT - Since the Ld. CIT(A) in the instant case has dismissed the appeal of assessee on account of delay of more than 03 months, therefore, respectfully following the decision of Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST. Katiji Ors 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT direct the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing of the appeal and decide the appeal of assessee on merit as per fact and Law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and subsequent dismissal of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) for the said delay.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Assessee against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) relating to the assessment year 2010-2011. The grounds of appeal primarily focused on the dismissal of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) due to a delay in filing. The Assessee had initially filed the return of income declaring total income, which was later revised due to the sale of immovable property. The A.O. accepted the indexed cost of acquisition but disallowed the indexed cost of improvement, resulting in an addition to the total income of the Assessee.

Before the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee explained the delay in filing the appeal, attributing it to not being informed about the assessment order until the bank account was seized. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating that the reasons for delay were not justified and that the Assessee did not act with reasonable diligence in prosecuting the appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the order enclosed with the appeal form was not a certified copy, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as non-est and defective.

The Tribunal, after hearing arguments from both sides, referred to the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji & Ors. It emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations in cases of delay. The Tribunal directed the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing the appeal and decide the appeal on its merits after giving the Assessee an opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal allowed the grounds raised by the Assessee for statistical purposes, ultimately allowing the appeal of the Assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision highlighted the importance of substantial justice and directed the Ld. CIT(A) to reconsider the appeal on its merits, emphasizing the need to balance technicalities with the fundamental principles of justice.