9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re in ITA No.234/IND/2024, whereby learned ITAT has dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of limitation, whereby the appeal was filed with a delay of 1797 days. 3. The brief facts of the case are that search and seizure under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act was carried out and Assessment Order under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act was passed on 30.12.2011 in which the total income was assessed at Rs.65,91,95,580/-. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed the appeal before Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) {in short "CIT(A)"}. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed appeal before the ITAT and vide order dated 17.05.2016, the matter was remanded back to Assessing Officer on certain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onding or imprisoned. The appellant in such circumstances could not coordinate properly with his tax consultants. At no point of time, the appellant received any notice from the CIT(A) as well as the order passed by the CIT(A) on 20.02.2019. This fact came to the knowledge of the appellant in the month of year 2024 and thereafter, without causing any delay, appeal was filed being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) before the ITAT on 22.03.2024. Out of the delay of 1797 days, the delay between 15.03.2020 to 30.05.2022 (period covered by Covid-19 pandemic) and also looking to the fact that the Apex Court on its own motion in SLP No.3/2020 had condoned the delay due to Covid-19 pandemic, meaning thereby only 990 days remained to be explained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "There can be no quarrel on the settled principle of law that delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, but a major aspect which has to be kept in mind is that, if in a particular case, the merits have to be examined, it should not be scuttled merely on the basis of limitation." 10. Similarly, the Supreme Court in the case of Mool Chandra (supra), has held as under: "It is not the length of delay that would be required to be considered while examining the plea for condonation of delay, it is the cause for delay which has been propounded will have to be examined. If the cause for delay would fall within the four corners of "sufficient cause", irrespective of the length of delay same deserves to be condoned. However, if the cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
