9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 1507 - AT - Income TaxDelay in filing of the appeal - Assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT (A), which was delayed by 191 days - reason of delay, it was explained is on account of health of the Director of the company supported by medical certificate and also ignorance of tax advisory, supported by certificate of tax advisor also - CIT (A) considered it as not a sufficient cause for condoning the delay - HELD THAT - We find that in case of Collector of land acquisition V MSt katiji 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT has laid down certain principles and also stated that a liberal approach in condoning the delay should be adopted. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also considered and reiterated all these principles in the three decisions cited before us of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We find that the delay in filing of the appeal deserves to be condoned by the learned CIT (A). We are also conscious of the fact that the assessee is unable to explain the complete delay. Therefore, in the interest of justice, assessee is directed to pay ₹5,000/- as a cost for each of these three appeals to be deposited in Prime Minister National Relief Fund within 30 days of the date of this order. Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues:
Delay in filing appeals, Condonation of delay, Sufficiency of cause for delay, Principles for condonation of delay, Merits of the case not considered by lower authorities Analysis: The judgment pertains to three appeals filed by the assessee against orders passed by the learned CIT (A) for Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The appeals were dismissed due to delays of 191 days, 189 days, and 119 days respectively. The reasons for delay cited were the ill health of the company's Director and inadequate advice from the tax advisor. The learned CIT (A) did not find these reasons sufficient to justify the delays and dismissed the appeals. The assessee argued that a lenient approach should be taken, citing relevant Supreme Court decisions where delays were condoned due to similar reasons such as illness of key personnel. The Departmental Representative supported the CIT (A)'s decision, emphasizing the need for sufficient cause to condone delays and questioning the consideration of merits based on a large paper book submitted by the assessee. In its analysis, the Appellate Tribunal noted that the assessee, a property rental company, had initially filed its return for A.Y. 2011-12 without scrutiny. However, during subsequent assessment proceedings, discrepancies in income bifurcation led to a reopening of the assessment under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, resulting in a revised total income and assessment. The Tribunal observed that the delay in filing the appeals was attributed to the Director's health issues and lack of proper tax advice, supported by medical and advisory certificates. Considering the principles laid down by the Supreme Court for condonation of delay, the Tribunal held that a liberal approach should be adopted. Despite the incomplete explanation for the delays, the Tribunal, in the interest of justice, directed the assessee to pay a nominal cost for each appeal to be deposited in the Prime Minister National Relief Fund. The Tribunal then condoned the delays and remanded the matters to the CIT (A) for a decision on the merits after the necessary details are furnished. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed all three appeals for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of adhering to legal principles while balancing the interests of justice and procedural requirements. The judgment highlights the significance of demonstrating sufficient cause for delay in filing appeals and the need for a pragmatic approach in condoning delays, especially in cases involving genuine reasons such as health issues of key personnel.
|
