1999 (2) TMI 92 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing appeal beyond the prescribed time limit under section 249(2) of the Income-tax Act.
2. Absence of application for condonation of delay under section 249(3).
3. Appellant's plea for condonation of delay due to unforeseen circumstances.
4. Interpretation of section 249 of the Income-tax Act.
5. Judicial discretion in admitting appeals after the expiration of the prescribed period.
6. Application of principles of natural justice in dealing with defective appeals.
7. Judicial discretion in condoning delays without a formal application.
8. Appellate authority's duty to provide opportunity for explanation before dismissing appeals as time-barred.
9. Referral of the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for consideration of condonation of delay.
10. Direction to consider the application for condonation of delay under section 249(3) of the I.T. Act.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appellant filed an appeal beyond the time limit specified in section 249(2) of the Income-tax Act, leading to its dismissal by the Commissioner (Appeals) for lack of an application for condonation of delay (section 249(3)).
2. The appellant argued that the delay was only one day due to unforeseen circumstances, supported by affidavits explaining the reasons for the delay.
3. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of judicial propriety in allowing the appellant to explain the delay, even though the Commissioner (Appeals) was not obligated to inform the appellant of the delay.
4. Section 249 of the Income-tax Act outlines the procedure for filing appeals, including the time limit and conditions for admission of appeals.
5. The Tribunal highlighted the discretionary power of the appellate authority under section 249(3) to admit appeals after the prescribed period if sufficient cause is shown.
6. In the absence of strict rules for dealing with defective appeals, the Tribunal stressed the need for natural justice and giving the appellant an opportunity to rectify any defects.
7. The Tribunal discussed the judicial discretion in condoning delays, citing cases where the appellate authority can condone delays even without a formal application.
8. Emphasizing the duty of the appellate authority to provide a fair hearing, the Tribunal underscored the importance of informing the appellant about delays and considering applications for condonation.
9. The Tribunal referred the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the application for condonation of delay under section 249(3) of the I.T. Act.
10. Finally, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, pending the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision on the application for condonation of delay.