TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeals allowed after significant delay due to genuine reasons, emphasizing liberal approach for justice</h1> <h3>M/s. M.D. Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Surat.</h3> M/s. M.D. Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Surat. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Condonation of Delay2. Adjudication on MeritsIssue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Condonation of Delay:The primary issue in these appeals was the condonation of an inordinate delay of 4378 days in filing the appeals. The appellant argued that the delay was due to genuine reasons, including the involvement of the group entities in settlement applications before the Income-tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) following a survey action on 11-03-2005. The appellant believed that filing appeals before the ITAT would result in avoidable multiplicity of proceedings and costs, as advised by their legal representative. The appellant also filed writ petitions challenging the abatement orders passed due to amendments in section 245D(4) of the Act by the Finance Act, 2007, which led to further delays.The Tribunal noted that in identical facts, delays had been condoned in other group cases by the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT. The Tribunal emphasized that the expression 'sufficient cause' should be construed liberally to advance substantial justice. The Tribunal referred to several judicial precedents, including the Supreme Court's decisions in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. and N. Balakrishnan v. M. Ramamurthy, which advocate a liberal approach towards condonation of delay to ensure justice.The Tribunal found that the appellant had acted on legal advice and had taken necessary steps to agitate the order passed by the Assessing Officer. The delay was attributed to unexpected events and not due to any inaction on the part of the appellant. The Tribunal concluded that there was a plausible explanation for the delay and condoned it, allowing the appeals to be decided on merits.2. Adjudication on Merits:Since the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals on the grounds of non-maintainability without adjudicating the issues on merits, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to set aside the orders of the CIT(A). The Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication on merits. The Tribunal emphasized maintaining judicial consistency and discipline, referencing the Co-ordinate Bench's decision to condone delays in similar cases.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeals for statistical purposes, condoning the delay and remanding the cases to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication on merits. The order was pronounced in the open court on 06-12-2019.
TaxTMI 