2025 (2) TMI 1219 - HC - Income Tax

HC permits 161-day delay in appeal filing under Section 253, citing medical reasons and no Revenue dispute

Jagdish Prasad Singhania Versus Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Raipur (C.G.)

The HC allowed the condonation of a 161-day delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT, overturning the ITAT's rejection. The delay was attributed to the ... Delay of 161 days in filing the appeal before ITAT - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, there is a delay of 161 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT and for which the Appellant/ Assessee has assigned the reason, supported with his affidavit dated 6.3.2023 and also certain medical documents (uncertified), that the wife of the assessee had undergone a major surgery and the assessee himself was not well during the relevant period of time and therefore delay of 161 occurred in filing the appeal be condoned, which the ITAT by the impugned Order rejected, holding that no justifiable reason has been assigned by the assessee for the inordinate delay of 161 days involved in filing the appeal and accordingly the appeal was also dismissed being barred by limitation. As decided in Vidya Shankar Jaiswal [2025 (1) TMI 1526 - SC ORDER] while setting aside the order of this Court rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay of 166 days therein, has held that the High Court ought to have adopted justice oriented and liberal approach by condoning the delay. As per the reason shown by the Appellant/Assessee for the delay, coupled with the fact the Respondent/Revenue did not file any counter-affidavit controverting the reason assigned by the assessee and as such the reason assigned by the assessee for delay in filing the appeal remained uncontroverted, the delay of 161 days occurred in filing the appeal before ITAT deserves to be and is hereby condoned and the substantial question of law is answered accordingly. ISSUES: Whether the delay of 161 days in filing the appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was sufficiently explained to justify condonation of delay.Whether the ITAT was justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation due to the delay without adopting a justice-oriented and liberal approach. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The Court held that the delay of 161 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT deserves to be condoned as the reason assigned by the appellant-medical issues including major surgery of the appellant's wife and the appellant's own ill health-was not controverted by the respondent and supported by affidavit and medical documents.The Court found the ITAT's order dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay to be unjustified and perverse to the record, emphasizing that the ITAT ought to have adopted a 'justice oriented and liberal approach' in condoning the delay, following the Supreme Court's precedent.The substantial question of law formulated was answered in favour of condonation of delay, and the matter was remitted to the ITAT for adjudication on merits. RATIONALE: The Court applied the principle established by the Supreme Court that delay in filing appeals should be condoned where sufficient cause is shown, and a 'justice oriented and liberal approach' is warranted rather than a rigid application of limitation rules.The Court relied on the Supreme Court's recent decision condoning a similar delay of 166 days, holding that the High Court erred in rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay without considering the appellant's explanation and medical circumstances.The absence of any counter-affidavit or challenge to the appellant's reasons for delay by the respondent reinforced the Court's conclusion that the delay was justified and should be condoned.The ruling reflects a doctrinal emphasis on substantive justice over procedural technicalities in tax appeal proceedings involving delay applications.