ITAT allows appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing genuine pursuit of alternative remedies

The ITAT allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT (A) and remanding the matter for a decision on merit. The delay of 440 days was attributed to pursuing an alternative remedy related to non-granting of credit for TDS, rectification petition issues, and administrative errors. The ITAT emphasized the importance of genuinely pursuing alternative remedies in condoning delays, following a precedent set by a tribunal order in a similar case.

---

---

Issues: Delay in filing appeal before CIT (A) and condonation of delay.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the assessee against an order of the CIT (A) refusing to condone the delay of 440 days in filing the appeal before him, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal as unadmitted without deciding the issue on merit.

2. The assessee explained that the delay was due to waiting for rectification pending before the AO against the order under section 143(1). The delay was caused as the assessee was pursuing an alternative remedy available under the law, specifically related to the non-granting of credit for TDS by the DCIT (CPC), which could be rectified under section 154.

3. The CIT (A) noted the assessee's explanation in para 4.1 of the order, where it was mentioned that the rectification petition under section 154 was filed on 23.01.2017 after receiving the demand notice on 09.01.2017. The delay was also attributed to the incorrect transfer of the rectification petition by the CPC to the AO, leading to further pursuit of the matter by the assessee.

4. The assessee relied on a tribunal order in a similar case to support the contention that if the assessee is genuinely pursuing an alternative remedy available under the law, the delay should be condoned. The tribunal order emphasized the importance of bonafide pursuit of alternative remedies in condoning delays.

5. The ITAT, after considering the submissions, found that the assessee was genuinely pursuing an alternative remedy available under the law. Following the precedent set by the tribunal order, the ITAT decided to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT (A) and remanded the matter back to the CIT (A) for a decision on merit.

6. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, indicating that the delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the matter was restored back to the CIT (A) for a decision on merit.

---