Appeal allowed after delay condoned by Tribunal, emphasizing fair opportunities and substantial justice.

The appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) as barred by limitation due to a delay in filing. The assessee sought condonation of delay citing oversight, but the Ld. CIT(A) found no reasonable cause for condonation. The Tribunal directed the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay, allowing the appeal in favor of the assessee on the grounds of disallowance of depreciation. This case emphasizes the importance of condoning delays to ensure substantial justice and highlights the need for fair opportunities for parties to present their cases.

---

---

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) leading to dismissal of the appeal as barred by limitation. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Disallowance of an amount on account of depreciation.

Delay in Filing Appeal:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 17th June, 2019, related to the assessment year 2016-17. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation due to a delay of 37 days in filing. The assessee contended that the delay was due to oversight and inadvertent mistake, requesting condonation of delay in the interest of justice. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal citing lack of reasonable/sufficient cause for condonation of delay.

Condonation of Delay:
The Hon'ble Supreme Court's observations in the case of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors emphasized the importance of condoning delay to prevent meritorious matters from being dismissed at the threshold, ensuring substantial justice. The Court highlighted that a rational and pragmatic approach must be taken in assessing delays, with a preference for substantial justice over technical considerations. It was noted that delay should not be presumed deliberate, negligent, or mala fide, and that the judiciary's role is to remove injustice rather than legalize it on technical grounds.

Disallowance of Depreciation:
The AO had disallowed an amount of Rs. 1,00,463 on account of income from other sources, which the assessee contested. The Ld. CIT(A) did not provide any finding on the merits of the case and dismissed the appeal in limine. The Tribunal, after considering the totality of the facts and in the interest of justice, directed the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing the appeal and decide the issue on its merits after giving the assessee a final opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.

This judgment highlights the significance of condoning delays in legal proceedings to uphold the principles of substantial justice and ensure that meritorious matters are not dismissed on technical grounds. It also underscores the importance of providing parties with a fair opportunity to present their case and have their appeals decided on merit.

---