9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... countant clearly shows that that an email was received from the accountant of the company on 13 November 2022 along with the screenshot of the adjustment made. As the chartered accountant was busy for filing income tax returns for his overseas clients which prevented him from paying close attention to the nature of the proceedings and he presumed that the company received a communication under the Act, and he filed a response on 13 November 2022 itself on the online portal. It is not the case of the carelessness on behalf of the assessee or its chartered accountant, but merely a case of misapprehension. It is also correct that in form number 35 the assessee has given a cryptic answer for delay. The explanation of the assessee is that there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (`the Act') dated August 13, 2024, by the Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Vadodara [ld. CIT(A)] is prejudicial to the Appellant, bad in law and liable to quashed. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CPC erred in not considering the response filed by the Appellant against communication received under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant without appreciating the facts and thereby the merits of the case. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CPC err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in filing of the appeal, but the reply of the reasons is merely that as a tax consultant are busy with tax filing deadline hence there was a delay by them The learned CIT A did not find the above reason as a sufficient cause and thereafter relying upon the several judicial precedents held that appellant has neither mentioned specific ground for delay in filing of the appeal and not furnished anything to prove that it acted diligently and was not guilty of negligence and therefore the above delay was not condoned and appeal of the assessee was not admitted. Hence, appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 5. Assessee aggrieved with the same has preferred this appeal. The learned authorized representative submitted that delay was nominal and fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of GST refund which has never been claimed by the assessee in the return of income as an expenditure and therefore these are the balance sheet items for which there cannot be any income chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee. He referred to page number 41, 176 and 184 of the paper books filed and submitted that this clearly shows that there is no income chargeable to tax and therefore even on the merits, the addition is wrongly made. 8. The learned departmental representative vehemently submitted that assessee has not given a sufficient reason but given a general reason for condonation of delay in filing appeal before the learned CIT A for 38 days and therefore no fault can be found with the order of the learned CIT A in not condo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso correct that in form number 35 the assessee has given a cryptic answer for delay. The explanation of the assessee is that there is no space available for filing a condonation of delay at that particular column. 11. In this case the delay is small and not inordinate. Nobody gains by filing an appeal late when substantial demand has arisen against him. 12. Honourable Supreme Court in Collective Land Acquisition versus Mst. Katiji 1987 taxmann.com 1072 (SC)/[1987] 28 ELT 185 (SC) has categorically held that :- 4. And such a liberal approach is adopted on principle as it is realized that: 1. Ordinarily, a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being throw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... treatment and the law is administered in an even-handed manner. There is no warrant for according a step-motherly treatment when the State is the applicant praying for condonation of delay. In fact, experience shows that on account of an impersonal machinery (no one in charge of the matter is directly hit or hurt by the judgment sought to be subjected to appeal) and the inherited bureaucratic methodology imbued with the note-making, file-pushing, and passing-on-the-buck ethos, delay on its part is less difficult to understand though more difficult to approve. In any event, the State which represents the collective cause of the community, does not deserve a litigant non grata status. The courts, therefore, have to be informed of the spirit a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
