TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (2) TMI 346
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and 478 of 2006 respectively. As the facts are common and the issue is identical, all the three appeals are dealt with together. 2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Manish J. Shah with learned advocate Mr. Deepak R Dave for the appellants appearing in all the three appeals, and Mr. Sudhir M. Mehta for the respondent department, who appeared upon issuance of notice by this Court. 2.1 In the facts of the case, the appeals are herewith admitted and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for both the sides, they are taken up for final disposal today itself to be decided by this common order. 2.2 In all the three appeals, in the facts of the case, the following common question is framed as substantial question of law for consideration and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith the explanation offered by the assessee, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals by not condoning the delay. 4. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted referring to the ground advanced, that the assessee running tuition class, was layman who had no knowledge with procedure of filing the appeals and had entrusted the work to his advocate and the tax expert. It was submitted that the delay had not occasioned on account of any fault or negligence on part of the assessee. He further submitted that delay ought to have been condoned by the Tribunal for which the assessee had genuine and sufficient cause. Learned advocate relied on decision in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamuthy [1998] 7 SCC 123. He further relied on this Court's decision in G....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hah used to file the return of income and was known to the assessee as he had been staying near the house of his father-in-law. The assessee submitted that he had been running a coaching class and was not well versed with the procedure of filing appeal. He had filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) through said Bharatbhai who engaged an advocate one Shri N.C. Amin. The appeals before the Tribunal were also assigned to said Shri Bharatbhai. However, on account of the fact that he remained busy during the March ending, (in completing time-barred assessment) the appeals could not be filed and in the meantime the limitation expired. The said reasons were stated on oath by filing two affidavits of the appellant dated 28.02....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acceptance of the explanation. While condoning delay the Court should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would have incurred quiet a large litigation expenses. It would be a salutary guideline that when courts condone the delay due to laches on the part of the applicant the court shall compensate the opposite party for his loss." 6.1 In Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. case (supra) this court observed that the Revenue must bear the established legal position in mind while dealing with an application seeking condonation of delay. It is necessary that a liberal approach is adopted in such matters to ensure that substantive rights are not defeated. In Chhaganbhai Mavjibh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the CIT(A) were also filed through him only. It was therefore natural for the assessee to entrust the work of filing of appeals before the Tribunal through him. 8. In Perumon Bhagvathy Devaswom v. Bhargavi Amma [2008] 8 SCC 321 it was reiterated that sufficient cause should be understood in pragmatic and practical manner. The test is that the delay is not on account of any dilatory tactics, want of bonafides, deliberate inaction or negligence on part of the appellant. In the same case it was also observed by the apex court that "The courts view applications relating to lawyer's lapses more leniently than applications relating to litigant's lapses. If the appeals could not be filed in time on account of Bharatbhai's failure to attend the c....