TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 990
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"); whereas ITA No.1236/Ahd/2016 arose against penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee in both these appeals is that the learned CIT(A) has erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeals before him and dismissing the appeals being time barred. 3. With the assistance of learned representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out from the record that the quantum appeal of the assessee was time barred before the First Appellate Authority by a period of one year and three days; whereas the penalty appeal was time barred by a period of six months and seven days. In order to explain the delay, the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. On account of consistent loss the company was closing down its offices in other cities and in particular the office at Mumbai. In view of this the records of the office were also shifted to the office at Kalamsar, Dist: Anand. This led to piling of huge record leading to difficulty in locating required papers. This led to many papers requiring urgent attention being left out to be attended. 3. On account of this factor beyond the control of the management-the matter as regards filing of appeal was left out. The delay therefore in filing of appeal was not intentional. It was on account of these exceptional circumstances that the matters requiring attention were left out. It can be appreciated that there was no casual approa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, 1987 AIR 1353: "1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....legal remedy for the redress of the legal injury so suffered. Time is precious and the wasted time would never revisit. During efflux of time newer causes would sprout up necessitating newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the courts. So a life span must be fixed for each remedy. Unending period for launching the remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy. Law of limitation is thus founded on public policy. It is enshrined in the maxim Interest reipublicae up sit finis litium (it is for the general welfare that a period be putt to litigation). Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of the parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek their remedy pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for his loss." 8. We do not deem it necessary to recite or recapitulate the proposition laid down in other decisions. It is suffice to say that the Hon'ble Courts are unanimous in their approach to propound that whenever the reasons assigned by an applicant for explaining the condonation of delay, then such reasons are to be construed with a justice oriented approach. If we look the explanation of the assessee, in the light of proposition propounded by the Hon'ble Courts, then, it would reveal that the assessee could not afford to make its appeal time-barred knowingly. The delay in filing the appeal happened on account of communication gap between the management as well as part-time accountant, who has collected copy of the order....