2024 (2) TMI 1191 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - delay of 206 days - assessee had not moved any condonation application explaining the reasons - HELD THAT - Though there is a substantial delay of 206 days involved in filing of the appeal, but the assessee had not moved any condonation application explaining the reasons leading to same. As observed by us hereinabove, as the assessee had not only remained negligent regarding the process of law and had filed the appeal before us after 206 days but had also failed to come forth with any explanation as regards the reasons leading to the said delay, therefore, there appears to be no reason to adopt a liberal view and condone the same. Also, we may observe at this juncture that the law of limitation has to be construed strictly as it has an effect of vesting with 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. The expression sufficient cause will always have relevancy to reasonableness. The action which can be condoned by the court should fall within the realm of normal human conduct or normal conduct of a litigant. However, as observed by us hereinabove, as the assessee appellant in the present case had not filed any condonation application explaining the reasons leading to the delay in filing the present appeal, and had adopted a lackadaisical approach, therefore, there can be no reason to condone the delay of 206 days involved in preferring of the captioned appeal. We observe that though there is an inordinate delay of 206 days involved in filing of the present appeal but the assessee had not filed any application seeking condonation of delay and this kind of conduct should be deprecated. Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the addition of unexplained cash deposited during demonetization period, application of Section 115BBE, delay in filing the appeal, and condonation of the delay.

Addition of unexplained cash:
The assessee failed to substantiate the source of cash deposits made during demonetization period, leading to the addition of Rs. 14,90,000 as unexplained cash under Sec. 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer (A.O) assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 19,51,600 based on this unexplained money.

Application of Section 115BBE:
The assessee challenged the application of Section 115BBE by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) in the case. The grounds of appeal included disputing the application of this section.

Delay in filing the appeal:
The present appeal involved a delay of 206 days, and the assessee did not file any application seeking condonation of the delay. The Authorized Representative for the assessee failed to rebut the lack of application for condonation.

Condonation of the delay:
The Tribunal considered the lackadaisical approach of the assessee in not filing the appeal within the stipulated time period. Citing previous judgments, the Tribunal emphasized the need for a bonafide application for condonation of delay. Since the assessee did not provide any explanation for the substantial delay, the Tribunal declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to the substantial delay in filing the appeal and the lack of application for condonation. The decision was made without delving into the merits of the case, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the time limits set by law.