2024 (2) TMI 38 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay in filling appeal before ITAT - delay of 384 days - delay involved in filing of present appeal has occurred on account of non-receipt of notice u/s 250 - HELD THAT - Assessee has deliberately chosen to adopt a lackadaisical approach and callous conduct during the said appellate proceedings. Even after when the letter u/s 133(6) dated 31.03.2023 was received, and the fact that an ex-parte order has been passed by the Ld. CIT(A) wayback on 12.09.2022, the appellant assessee continuing with the same careless approach took another 9 months time in filing the appeal before the tribunal. Such conduct of the assessee shows that the reasons offered by the assessee towards seeking the condonations in delay in filing of appeal are not reasonable neither the same constitutes any sufficient cause towards the delay. Under such facts and circumstances, there appears to be no reason to adopt a liberal view and condone the inordinate delay therein involved. Also, we may observe at this juncture that the law of limitation has to be construed strictly as it has an effect of vesting on one and taking away the right from the other party. The delay in filing of the appeals cannot be condoned in a mechanical or a routine manner since that would undoubtedly jeopardize the legislative intent behind Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Assessee appellant has squarely failed to substantiate with any plausible and sufficient reasons to justify the condonation of inordinate delay of 384 days involved in filing of the present appeal. We, therefore, in our thoughtful consideration do not find any merit in the explanations and reasons submitted by the assessee towards the request seeking the condonation of delay in filling of the captioned appeal, therefore, we decline the same, and, thus, without adverting to the merits of the case dismiss the captioned appeal of the assessee, as barred by limitation.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Assessee in default under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Condonation of delay in filing appeals.

Summary:

Issue 1: Assessee in Default under Section 201(1) & 201(1A)
The assessee challenged the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the Income Tax Officer's action treating the appellant as an assessee in default and determining a total demand payable of Rs. 4,30,668/- under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant argued that the recipient was registered under Section 12AA of the Act and had filed its return of income, considering the sum received on which TDS was not made for computing income. The Tribunal noted that the appeals involved identical issues for different assessment years and decided to adjudicate based on ITA No. 364/RPR/2023 for the assessment year 2012-13.

Issue 2: Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeals
The appeals were barred by a delay of 384 days. The assessee submitted an application for condonation of delay, citing reasons such as non-receipt of notice under Section 250 and the appellate order, and coming to know about the order only on 31/03/2023 while filing a reply to the recovery of demand notice. The Tribunal examined the reasons for the delay and found that the assessee was duty-bound to access the ITBA portal, especially since the appeal was filed at the assessee's instance. The Tribunal observed that the assessee's conduct showed a lackadaisical approach and callous conduct during the appellate proceedings, and even after being informed about the ex-parte order, the assessee took another 9 months to file the appeal.

The Tribunal referred to several judgments, including Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Katiji and others, and M/s Karnataka Forest Development Corporation Ltd. vs. ACIT, but found that the reasons offered by the assessee did not constitute sufficient cause for the delay. The Tribunal emphasized that the law of limitation must be construed strictly and declined to condone the inordinate delay.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, including ITA Nos. 364 to 368/RPR/2023, as barred by limitation without addressing the merits of the case. The order was pronounced in the open court on 29/01/2024.