2022 (8) TMI 1554 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay filling appeal before CIT - Delay of 314 days in filing the appeal - HELD THAT - Affidavit seeking condonation of delay shows that the assessee had undisputedly filed the return of income electronically but under bonafide belief that the Form 10CCB was to be filed manually with the AO as and when required thus failed to file the same electronically along with the return of income. No doubt ignorance of law is no excuse but keeping in view the fact that it was first year of filing the return of income along with Form 10CCB electronically and due to human error and under bonafide belief assessee has failed to file the same electronically which was well within their notice. As decided in Land Acquisition Collector vs. MST Katiji Others 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have a vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. So we are of the considered view that assessee has brought on record sufficient causes to condone the delay of 314 days in filing the appeal, which is accordingly condoned as the assessee has the right to be heard on merits. So in these circumstances, we hereby condone the delay of 314 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and consequently present appeal is being remitted back to Ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh on merits.

Summary

Issues:
Delay of 314 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the application for condonation of the delay.

Analysis:
The judgment involves the issue of condonation of a delay of 314 days in filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appellant, M/s. Atlantic Bio Medical Pvt. Ltd., challenged the impugned order dismissing the appeal without considering the merits due to the delay. The appellant sought to condone the delay by providing reasons for the delay, stating that the accountant failed to file certain documents electronically along with the return of income due to a bonafide belief that they were to be filed manually when required. The Revenue opposed the application, alleging malafide intention on the part of the appellant.

Upon considering the submissions and documents, the Tribunal found that the appellant had filed the return of income electronically but failed to file certain documents due to a bonafide belief, which was a human error in the first year of electronic filing. Citing the decision in Land Acquisition Collector vs. MST Katiji, the Tribunal emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations in condoning the delay. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant had provided sufficient cause to condone the delay and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes. The delay of 314 days was condoned, and the matter was remitted back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for a fresh decision on merits after providing the appellant with an opportunity to be heard.

In summary, the judgment addressed the issue of condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) due to reasons provided by the appellant. The Tribunal, following the principle of substantial justice, condoned the delay of 314 days, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes and remitting the matter back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for a fresh decision on merits.