2010 (4) TMI 266

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2007. For the period the appeal was pending before the CIT (A) Karnal, delay of 242 days had occurred for which an application for condonation of delay was filed. Tribunal refused to condone the delay – Held that: - appellant was pursuing the remedy at a wrong forum in a bona fide belief that the appeal was competent before the CIT (A) Karnal, the Tribunal should have condoned the delay. It is evi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the application filed by the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 242 days. According to the averments made in the application, the appellant had mistakenly availed the remedy of appeal before the Regular Appellate Authority i.e. CIT (A) Karnal where it had filed an appeal on 21.11.2006 against the order dated 31.10.2006 passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 144 of the Act. The CIT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e fact that the appellant was pursuing the remedy at a wrong forum in a bona fide belief that the appeal was competent before the CIT (A) Karnal, the Tribunal should have condoned the delay. It is evident that the aforesaid course was adopted by the appellant without any ill intention to avail any benefit. The delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for the period spent on pursuing the reme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X