2022 (11) TMI 1047 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of Delay of 402 days - order was misplaced due to shifting of assessee s office to new head office building - assessee filed immediately after the original order found subsequently and due to which there was a delay in filing the present appeal - DR argued that there was no evidence to show the shifting of assessee s office to head office building and the assessee did not place on record any evidence explaining the delay on day to day basis - HELD THAT - Admittedly, the delay of 402 days as rightly admitted by the ld. AR is inordinate delay and also correct that no reasons were explained on day to day basis in the said notarized affidavit. Merely, stating that assessee s office shifted to head office building does not constitute the valid reason which really prevented to assessee to file the appeal in time. The statement of misplacing of order, in our opinion, the assessee made the same very casually which was made for the purpose of making a statement without any basis. We note that the assessee is a District Central Co-op. Bank, managed by highly qualified officers and well trained professionals in respect of accounts and litigation. Therefore, statement of, that the impugned order was misplaced due to shifting of assessee s office to head office building is a mere statement without any evidence made for the purpose of filing the said affidavit. Therefore, the assessee failed to show valid reasons explaining day to day basis with evidences for the delay of 402 days which really prevented the assessee in filing the appeal in time. Therefore, in the absence of such valid reasons the arguments advanced along with the averments in the notarized affidavit deposed by the General Manager representing the assessee are rejected. Thus, the delay of 402 days is not condoned and the appeal is dismissed.

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, condonation of delay.

Analysis:
1. Delay in filing appeal: The appeal was filed with a delay of 402 days against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee explained the delay by stating that the order was misplaced due to the shifting of the office to a new head office building. The General Manager representing the assessee filed a notarized affidavit explaining the delay. The assessee argued that there was no intention to file the appeal late, and the delay was inadvertent.

2. Condonation of delay: The ld. DR vehemently opposed the arguments of the assessee, stating that there was no evidence to support the shifting of the office to a new building. The ld. DR argued that the delay was inordinate, amounting to 402 days, and there was no valid reason provided on a day-to-day basis for the delay. The ld. DR emphasized that the delay should not be condoned and urged to reject the submissions of the assessee.

3. Judgment: After hearing both parties, the Tribunal examined the notarized affidavit filed by the General Manager representing the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the delay was indeed 402 days, as admitted by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the reasons provided for the delay, such as misplacing the order due to office shifting, were not substantiated with valid evidence. The Tribunal observed that the statement regarding the misplacement of the order seemed casual and without basis. Additionally, considering the professional expertise of the assessee being a District Central Co-op. Bank, the Tribunal concluded that the reasons provided were insufficient to justify the delay. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the arguments and averments in the affidavit, declined to condone the delay, and dismissed the appeal.

4. Conclusion: The Tribunal, based on the lack of valid reasons and evidence for the delay, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The delay of 402 days was deemed inordinate and not condoned. The judgment was pronounced on 21st September 2022 by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune.

← Previous Next →