Tribunal grants condonation of delay in filing appeals under Income Tax Act

The Tribunal allowed the condonation of delay in filing appeals against assessment and penalty orders under the Income Tax Act, considering the appellant's intention to opt for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. Despite significant delays attributed to business closure and medical reasons, the Tribunal applied principles emphasizing substantial justice and granted the condonation. The appeals were dismissed with the opportunity for restoration if necessary under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in filing appeals against assessment order and penalty order.
2. Condonation of delay under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
3. Justification for delay due to medical reasons and closure of business operations.
4. Application of principles for condonation of delay as per legal precedents.
5. Decision on condonation of delay and dismissal of appeals.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed appeals against the assessment order and penalty order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The first order partly allowed the appeal against the assessment order under sections 144 and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, while the second order dismissed the appeal against the penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

2. The appellant sought to opt for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020, but faced delays in filing the appeals. The appellant cited Circular No. 21/2020 issued by the CBDT, stating eligibility upon condonation of delay by the competent authority.

3. The appellant explained the delays of 1189 days in filing the appeal against the quantum order and 307 days against the penalty order. The delay was attributed to the closure of business operations and medical treatment of a partner. The appellant, a partnership firm with a contract to run a Chemist Shop in PGI Chandigarh, faced challenges in receiving the appellate order due to business closure and partner's health issues.

4. The legal representatives presented arguments based on the principles of condonation of delay as outlined in the case law of Collector, Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987). These principles emphasized the importance of substantial justice over technical considerations and the need for a pragmatic approach in assessing delay.

5. After considering submissions from both sides, the Tribunal acknowledged the inordinate delay but noted the appellant's intention to avail benefits under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. Following the principles laid down by the Supreme Court, the Tribunal took a lenient view and allowed the condonation of delay. The appeals were dismissed with the liberty to file for restoration if issues remain unresolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

---