2018 (3) TMI 1302 - AT - Income Tax

Appeals dismissed for substantial delays without valid justifications. Ignorance of law not a sufficient cause.

The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the appeals as time-barred due to substantial delays in filing, without valid justifications ... Condonation of delay in filing appeal before CIT(A) - ignorance of law by the Chartered Accountant - allowability of loss - section 94(7) of the I.T. Act - Held that: - there is an inordinate delay in filing the appeals before the Ld. CIT(A) without justification and as such, prejudice have been caused to the Revenue Department - Further, no sufficient cause have been disclosed in the explanation of assessee-company. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A), correctly dismissed the appeals of the assessee-company by holding them to be time barred - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. Issues:- Appeals against orders of Ld. CIT(A) dismissed as time-barred due to delay in filing.- Contention of the Assessee regarding condonation of delay.- Revenue's argument supporting the dismissal of appeals.Analysis:1. Delay in Filing Appeals:- The appeals by the assessee-company were against orders of Ld. CIT(A) for A.Ys. 2005-2006 and 2008-2009, challenging disallowances under section 94(7) of the I.T. Act.- The A.O. passed assessment orders in 2007 and 2010, and the assessee agreed to the disallowances without penalty.- The appeals were filed after 8 and 4 years respectively, claiming ignorance of law as the reason for delay.- The Ld. CIT(A) found no sufficient cause for the delay, noting the assessee's failure to provide justifications for the late appeals.- Judicial precedents were cited to emphasize the importance of valid reasons for condoning delays in filing appeals.2. Contention for Condonation of Delay:- Assessee contended that the delay was due to the Chartered Accountant's ignorance of law, later advised by an Advocate that the amount was not taxable.- However, the Tribunal observed that the appeals were not maintainable as the assessee had agreed to the additions earlier, and no valid reason was presented for the delay.3. Revenue's Argument:- The Revenue supported the dismissal of appeals, asserting that no valid cause was disclosed for condonation of delay.- Emphasized that the delay prejudiced the Revenue Department, and the assessee failed to provide sufficient reasons for the delay.4. Judicial Pronouncements and Decision:- The Tribunal relied on various court decisions to highlight the need for valid reasons when seeking condonation of delay.- Noting the substantial delay in filing the appeals without proper justification, the Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the appeals as time-barred.- Concluded that no interference was warranted, and both appeals of the assessee-company were dismissed.This comprehensive analysis outlines the key issues, arguments presented by both parties, the Tribunal's decision based on legal principles, and the reasons for dismissing the appeals as time-barred due to unjustified delays in filing.