2020 (11) TMI 896 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee's Appeals Dismissed for Late Filing Fees Under Section 234E

Shri Dhalu Mal Dhaman Das Versus The ACIT, CPC (TDS), Gaziabad.

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeals against orders of ld. CIT(A) for late filing fees under U/s 234E of the Act for financial years 2012-13 Q. ... Condonation of delay in filing of appeal - eligible reasons to delay - Delay of 18 months - vague statement that due to medical problems the appeal could not be filed in time - HELD THAT:- Assessee has neither explained what medical problems be suffered from nor any supporting document is filed. Even the application for condonation of delay is not supported by an affidavit. As manifest from the record that there is inordinate delay even in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The intimation has issued on 23.12.2013 which was challenged by the assessee by filing the appeal on 29.02.2016 which shows that there is more than two years delay. Even before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has not explained any cause of delay in filing the appeal. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as not maintain such being barred by limitation. These facts clearly show that the assessee is not taking tax matter seriously. The conduct of the assessee does not inspire the confidence and hence, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee has grossly failed to explain the reasonable cause in filing the appeal belatedly. Accordingly, we decline to condone the delay of about 18 months in filing the present appeals - Decided against assessee. Issues:Appeals against orders of ld. CIT(A) for financial years 2012-13 Q. 4th and 2013-14 Q. 4th due to late filing fees U/s 234E of the Act. Delay in filing appeals by the assessee. Condonation of delay application by the assessee.Analysis:The appeals were filed by the assessee against orders of ld. CIT(A) for the financial years 2012-13 Q. 4th and 2013-14 Q. 4th regarding late filing fees U/s 234E of the Act. The hearing was conducted via video conference due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The assessee did not appear during the hearing, but submitted a letter requesting to dispose of the appeals based on written submissions. The delay in filing the appeals was about 18 months. The assessee sought condonation of delay citing medical problems as the reason for late filing. However, no supporting affidavit or documentary evidence was provided by the assessee.The DR opposed the condonation of delay, highlighting the assessee's habitual defaults in submitting TDS statements and filing appeals. The ld. CIT(A) noted the inordinate delay in filing the appeals without any reasonable cause or explanation from the assessee. The explanation provided by the assessee regarding medical problems was deemed vague and unsupported. The delay in filing the appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and the Tribunal was not adequately explained by the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessee's conduct did not merit leniency, as the reasons given for the delay were lacking in bonafide reasons or supporting evidence.The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to provide a reasonable cause for the significant delay in filing the appeals. Despite the principle of preferring substantial justice over technical considerations, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee's conduct did not inspire confidence. The Tribunal declined to condone the delay of about 18 months in filing the appeals, ultimately dismissing the appeals as barred by limitation. The decision was based on the assessee's failure to satisfactorily explain the unreasonable delay in approaching the Tribunal.In conclusion, the appeals of the assessee were dismissed due to the significant delay in filing without providing a valid and supported reason, leading to the rejection of the condonation of delay application.