2021 (4) TMI 991 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - delay has made out a sufficient cause or not - Delay of 52 days in filing of the appeal - HELD THAT - As the Assessee is not in India, he had to depend upon the services of his tax consultant at Vijayawada. He coordinated with the tax consultant at Hyderabad to file the appeal before ITAT. Assessee was regularly pursuing with his tax consultant at Vijayawada about the filing of appeal. He was advised that a fee of ₹ 10,000 needs to be paid as appeal fee to file the appeal, which was paid by the Assessee on 10th December, 2019. It was informed to the Assessee that the due date of filing the appeal expired on 02nd December, 2019. Then it was informed the Assessee that, the tax consultant at Hyderabad was busy in tax scrutiny assessments of other clients till the end of December, 2019. Then the appeal had been drafted and soft copies were sent to the Assessee through email. It was also informed to the Assessee that, only physically signed documents are permitted while filing the appeal before the ITAT. The Assessee sent such documents, duly signed by him, to his tax consultant at Vijayawada. He sent the same to Hyderabad tax consultant, who ultimately got them filed before the ITAT on 23rd January, 2020. The explanation of the Assessee is supported by his affidavit and the department did not express refute the stand taken by the Assessee. The delay in filing the appeal is occurred due to Assessee is staying in abroad, therefore there seems to be no mala fide intention for causing delay but the same prima facie appears to be bona fide and reasonable, hence in our considered opinion the Assessee has shown the sufficient cause for delay and therefore the delay of 52 days in filing of the appeal deserves to be condoned. Even the Assessee intends to get settled the dispute through 'the VSV Scheme' and has already initiated the process and willing to pay the relevant taxes. It is the public policy of nation that litigations must come to an end. Thus we are inclined to admit the appeal by condoning the delay of 52 days in filing of the appeal, consequently the delay stands condoned.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal, application for condonation of delay, maintainability of delayed application, sufficient cause for delay, application of Vivad se Vishwas scheme.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM dealt with the Assessee's Application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The Bench observed a delay of 52 days in filing the appeal and decided to first address the condonation application. The issue arose regarding the entertainability and maintainability of a belated application for condonation of delay. Referring to a Supreme Court case, the Tribunal concluded that such applications filed at a later stage can be entertained and are maintainable, treating the deficiency as a curable defect.

The Assessee supported the condonation application with an affidavit, citing reasons for the delay. The Assessee's tax consultant's inability to represent the case and coordination issues due to being abroad were highlighted. The Tribunal emphasized that the period of delay is not crucial; the focus should be on whether a sufficient cause has been presented. The Assessee's detailed explanation, supported by an affidavit, and lack of refutation from the department, indicated a bona fide intention behind the delay.

Moreover, the Assessee's initiation of the process under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme was noted, reflecting a willingness to settle the dispute and pay relevant taxes. Considering the peculiar circumstances and the public policy favoring the resolution of litigations, the Tribunal decided to admit the appeal by condoning the 52-day delay. The Tribunal directed the Registry to schedule the appeal for a hearing and pronounced the order in open Court, allowing the Assessee's application for condonation of delay.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's detailed analysis focused on the sufficiency of cause for the delay in filing the appeal, the Assessee's genuine efforts to comply, and the broader context of resolving disputes efficiently through schemes like Vivad se Vishwas. The judgment balanced legal technicalities with the principles of fairness and public policy, ultimately allowing the appeal and granting the Assessee's application for condonation of delay.