Assessee's Appeal Dismissed for Filing Delay - Condonation Rejected

The appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Tribunal due to a delay of 449 days in filing the appeal. The Tribunal found that the reasons provided did not constitute a reasonable cause for condonation of delay as required by the law. The appeal was deemed not maintainable, and the petition for condonation of delay was rejected. The final order was pronounced on 14th December 2022 at Chennai.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Delay in filing the appeal.
2. Reasonable cause for the delay.
3. Application of case law for condonation of delay.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The appeal filed by the assessee was time-barred with a delay of 449 days. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay, supported by an affidavit detailing the reasons for the delay.

2. Reasonable Cause for the Delay:
The affidavit submitted by the assessee outlined several reasons for the delay:
- The order from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) was received on 24.04.2019.
- An appeal against the order under section 143(3) read with section 263 was filed on 14.01.2020.
- The assessee approached a Chartered Accountant (C.A.), Shri T. Banusekar, in March 2020, who advised filing an appeal against the PCIT's order.
- The COVID-19 lockdown caused further delays in gathering information and drafting the appeal.
- The appeal was finally filed on 14.09.2020, resulting in a 449-day delay.

3. Application of Case Law for Condonation of Delay:
The assessee's counsel argued for condonation of delay, citing the Supreme Court judgment in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji & Ors. The Departmental Representative (DR) opposed, referencing a Tribunal decision in Mrs. Preeti Madhok v. ITO, where a similar delay was not condoned.

Tribunal's Findings:
- The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not initially seek advice on filing an appeal against the PCIT's order.
- The affidavit from the C.A. stating he did not advise filing an appeal was considered an afterthought.
- The Tribunal found no material evidence that the assessee sought advice on filing the appeal.
- The cited case law, Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji & Ors., was deemed inapplicable to the present case.
- The Tribunal referenced the decision in Mrs. Preeti Madhok v. ITO, emphasizing that ignorance of law is not a valid excuse, especially when the assessee was represented by professionals.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the reasons provided by the assessee did not constitute a reasonable cause for condonation of delay as prescribed under the Act. Consequently, the petition for condonation of delay was rejected, rendering the appeal not maintainable. The appeal was dismissed.

Final Order:
The appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed. The order was pronounced on 14th December 2022 at Chennai.

---