University's Tax Appeal Dismissed Due to Delay, Tribunal Condoned Delay, Remanded for Adjudication

The appeals filed by the University against orders of the ld. CIT (A) for assessment years 2009-10 to 2015-16 under the IT Act were dismissed as barred by limitation due to a delay of 87 days attributed to wrong advice from Counsel. The delay was later condoned by the Tribunal, emphasizing a liberal approach in condoning delays when genuine reasons are established. The matter was remanded for adjudication on merits by the ld. CIT (A) following the decision pronounced on 04/09/2018.

---

---

Issues:
Delay in filing appeals before the ld. CIT (A) for assessment years 2009-10 to 2015-16 due to wrong advice given by Counsel and subsequent rejection of application under section 154 by AO.

Analysis:
The appeals by the assessee were directed against orders of ld. CIT (A) for assessment years 2009-10 to 2015-16 under section 201(1) / 201(1A) of the IT Act. The assessee, a University, faced action for not deducting TDS on pension payments. The AO passed orders holding the assessee as assessee in default. The assessee filed applications under section 154 seeking rectification, which were rejected by the AO. Subsequently, the appeals were filed with a delay of 87 days after the order under section 154. The delay was attributed to wrong advice from Counsel. The ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeals as barred by limitation.

The assessee contended that the delay was not intentional but due to Counsel's advice. The delay after the order under section 154 was explained, and it was argued that the delay should be condoned for a fair hearing on merits. The Counsel referred to a High Court judgment in the assessee's favor regarding tax liability before the University's incorporation date.

The ld. CIT (A) rejected the condonation of delay application citing manual filing delays and lack of genuine cause. However, the delay of 87 days was not abnormal, especially considering the nature of the issue as vicarious liability. The appeals were initially filed manually but later electronically, rectifying the procedural defect. Consequently, the delay in filing appeals was condoned, and the matter was remanded for adjudication on merits by the ld. CIT (A).

The Tribunal found that the delay was not deliberate and that the reasons were genuine. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing a liberal approach in condoning delays when factual correctness is established. The decision was pronounced on 04/09/2018.

---