2021 (1) TMI 1360 - HC - Income Tax

Condonation of delay in filing appeal due to secretary's serious ill health; court exercised discretionary relief and allowed appeal.

Condonation of a 1,637day delay in filing an appeal was allowed where the secretary swore to serious ill health, the illness affidavit was not disputed by ... Condonation of the delay of 1637 days in filing the appeal - delay which, according to the Revenue, is inordinate, unexplained and should not be condoned - HELD THAT:- Delay can be condoned in the instant case for more than one reason. Firstly, the Secretary of any organization is solely responsible for the conduct of the activities of the organization and the Secretary has sworn to an affidavit explaining his serious health condition, which obviously has not been denied by the Revenue in their counter. Society does not stand to benefit by lodging the appeal belatedly. The Revenue does not allege any mala fides against the society for lodging the appeal belatedly. It is true that length of appeal is not always an issue, as, at times, even a meager delay will be refused to be condoned if it is established that the person approaching the Court belatedly has done so for certain mala fide reasons or with an ulterior intention. In the absence of any such allegation against the petitioner – assessee, we are inclined to exercise our discretion. Delay is condoned and this petition is ordered. Issues: (i) Whether the delay of 1637 days in instituting the appeal can be condoned.Analysis: The petition advances reasons for delay including internal management difficulties, change of office-bearers, prolonged serious illness of the society's secretary with hospitalization and surgery resulting in near inactivity for close to two years, subsequent steps taken to engage auditors and counsel, and disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Revenue does not allege mala fide motive and has not denied the secretary's health condition. The legal framework emphasises that condonation of delay rests on judicial discretion guided by whether sufficient cause is shown, whether substantial justice would be defeated by refusal, and whether mala fide or ulterior motives exist. Precedents invoking substantial justice and examination of sufficient cause are relied upon to demonstrate that technical delay should not defeat substantive rights where acceptable explanations are furnished. The court applied these principles to the facts and found the explanation credible and uncontradicted on material points, and that the society would not gain unfair advantage by the belated filing.Conclusion: The delay of 1637 days is condoned and the petition for condonation is allowed in favour of the assessee.