9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Non-admission of appeals by CIT(A) treating them as non est due to late filing. 2. Condonation of delay in filing appeals before CIT(A) due to illness of the director. 3. Application of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in condoning the delay. Detailed Analysis: 1. The main issue in this case revolved around the non-admission of appeals by the CIT(A) due to late filing, treating them as non est. The appeals were against the penalty order and the assessment order passed by the AO under the IT Act, 1961. The CIT(A) observed that the appeals were filed late, beyond the prescribed period of thirty days from the receipt of the orders appealed against. The assessee cited the illness of the director as the reason for the delay, supported by a medical certificate. However, the CIT(A) refused to admit the appeals, considering the circumstances and the timeline of events. 2. The second issue addressed the condonation of the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) due to the illness of the director. The assessee submitted a medical certificate and a letter requesting condonation of the delay, explaining that the director was ill and unable to file the appeals on time. The Tribunal considered the submissions of both parties, reviewed the medical certificate, and referred to a decision of the Gujarat High Court emphasizing a liberal approach in condoning delays to ensure substantive rights are not defeated based on technicalities. The Tribunal found that the medical certificate provided sufficient cause for the delay and decided to condone the delay. 3. Lastly, the Tribunal applied the decision of the Gujarat High Court, emphasizing the need for a liberal approach in condoning delays to ensure that cases are decided on merits rather than technical grounds. By adopting a liberal approach and considering the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal decided to allow the appeals, setting aside the orders of the CIT(A) and restoring the matters for fresh consideration on merits, providing the assessee with reasonable opportunities to present their case. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on the importance of considering genuine reasons for delays in filing appeals, adopting a liberal approach to ensure substantive rights are upheld, and providing parties with opportunities to be heard and have their cases decided on merits rather than technicalities.
|
