https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61145 The tribunal found that the delay in filing the appeal, caused by incorrect service to an unauthorized individual, was justified due to reasonable cause. Citing legal precedents emphasizing the need for authorized representation, the tribunal concluded that the delay was not intentional but a result of communication issues. Despite the significant delay of 248 days, it was deemed non-malicious, and the appeal was admitted for consideration on its merits. The tribunal highlighted the importance of valid representation and condoned the delay based on the lack of malice or recklessness. en-us Mon, 25 May 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jan 2011 11:13:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61145 The tribunal found that the delay in filing the appeal, caused by incorrect service to an unauthorized individual, was justified due to reasonable cause. Citing legal precedents emphasizing the need for authorized representation, the tribunal concluded that the delay was not intentional but a result of communication issues. Despite the significant delay of 248 days, it was deemed non-malicious, and the appeal was admitted for consideration on its merits. The tribunal highlighted the importance of valid representation and condoned the delay based on the lack of malice or recklessness. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 25 May 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61145