9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our appeals were filed before the learned CIT(A) against the orders of the learned AO dt. 29th June, 1999, 16th Sept., 1998, 11th Sept., 1998, and 18th Sept., 1998. Aggrieved with the action taken under s. 201(1A), r/w ss. 200 and 194-I of the IT Act, vide which the learned ITO, TDS, levied an interest of Rs. 1,10,23,030 for the financial yrs. 1997-98 and 1996-97. All these appeals were filed before the first appellate authority on 31st Aug., 1999. According to the first appellate authority, the appeal for asst. yr. 1998-99 was time-barred by 30 days whereas the rest of the appeals were time-barred by 345 days. 4. When this fact was brought to the notice of the assessee and it was asked to show the reasons for such delay, the assessee has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s valuable right of appeal is seen to have lost or forfeited. In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, we request your honour to kindly condone the delay by exercising the power vested with your honour under s. 249(3) of the IT Act, for the sake of natural justice, which was caused on account of reasons beyond our control." According to the first appellate authority, the explanation of the assessee is not sufficient for condoning the huge delay of 345 days. The learned first appellate authority was of the opinion that the assessee has admitted the receipts of notice. It was under obligation to make arrangement for filing the appeals well in time. Had the application for condonation of delay been filed along with the filing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... satisfaction of the Court. The expression "sufficient cause or reason" as provided in sub-s. (3) of s. 249 of the IT Act is used in identical position in the Limitation Act and the CPC. Such expression has also been used in other sections of the IT Act such as ss. 274, 273, etc. The expression "sufficient cause" within the meaning of s. 5 of the Limitation Act as well as similar other provisions, the ambit of exercise of powers thereunder have been subject-matter of consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court on various occasions. In the case of State of West Bengal vs. The Administrator, Howrah Municipality AIR 1972 SC 749 the Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the scope of expression "sufficient cause" for condonation of delay ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to a want of acceptable explanation, whereas in certain other cases, delay of a very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. Once the Court accepts the explanation as sufficient, it is the result of positive exercise of discretion and normally the superior Court should not disturb such finding, much less in revisional jurisdiction, unless the exercise of discretion was on wholly untenable grounds or arbitrary or perverse. But it is a different matter when the first Court refuses to condone the delay. In such cases, the superior ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ic approach should be made, why not every hour's delay, every second's delay. The doctrine must be applied on a rational commonsense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. 5. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact he runs a serious risk. 6. It must be grasped that judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts must show utmost consideration to such litigant. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan, the length of delay is no matter. It is the acceptability of the explanation. That is the only criteria before condoning the delay. At the most for the inaction or a little negligence, the assessee can be burdened with the cost. But his right of hearing of the appeal on merit ought not to be shut. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in the larger interest of justice, we are of the opinion that these appeals deserve to be allowed. We condone the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the learned first appellate authority, who will decide the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
