9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 646 - AT - Income TaxCondonation of delay in appeal before CIT(A) - Appeal after failure to get Rectification u/s 154 - delay of 491 days - HELD THAT - CIT(A) cannot find fault with the assessee.The assessee exploring an alternate remedy by filing the petition u/s 154 before the A.O. and it was filed within the time limit allowed u/s 154 of the Act. The assessee has said to be not received the order passed u/s 154 by the A.O. Later on, the assessee had applied for certified copy of order passed u/s 154 by A.O., which was duly received by the assessee on 10.11.2017. Assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) on 23.11.2017 with a delay of 491 days against the order passed by the A.O. u/s. 143(3) - there was a delay of 491 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Accordingly, find reasonable and sufficient cause for filing the appeal before the CIT(A) belatedly. Therefore, condone the delay of 491 days in filing the appeal belatedly before the CIT(A) and direct the CIT(A) to admit the appeal and decide the same on merits. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Issues:
Delay in filing appeal before CIT(A) - Condonation of delay Analysis: The appeal was filed against the order of the CIT(A) dated 16.09.2019 for the assessment year 2014-2015. The assessee raised various grounds challenging the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 491 days in filing the appeal. The assessee explained the reasons for the delay, stating that they were pursuing rectification under section 154 of the Income Tax Act based on advice from their Chartered Accountant. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as unadmitted, citing lack of reasonable cause for the delay. However, the ITAT Bangalore, in its judgment, analyzed the case and found that the delay was due to the assessee exploring an alternate remedy by filing a petition under section 154 within the statutory time allowed. The ITAT held that there was a reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay and thus condoned the delay of 491 days, directing the CIT(A) to admit the appeal and decide on merits. The ITAT referred to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding the condonation of delay, emphasizing that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The ITAT also highlighted that the delay in filing the appeal was not willful and was supported by bonafide reasons. The ITAT further noted that the assessee had taken steps promptly upon realizing the mistake and had filed the appeal within a reasonable time after receiving the certified copy of the order passed under section 154 of the Act. Therefore, the ITAT concluded that the delay should be condoned in the interest of justice and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. In conclusion, the ITAT Bangalore allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, emphasizing the importance of considering substantial justice over technicalities in condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The ITAT's decision to condone the delay of 491 days was based on the assessee's reasonable cause for pursuing rectification under section 154 and the timely filing of the appeal after receiving the necessary documentation. The ITAT directed the CIT(A) to admit the appeal and decide on its merits, highlighting the need to uphold justice in the circumstances of the case.
|
