TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 934
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne the delay in filing the same and treating the same as barred by limitation. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual, who is regularly assessed to income-tax. During the course of assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2011-12, he was found to have maintained a Savings Account with Axis Bank, which was not reflected in the Balance-sheet of the assessee as on 31.03.2011 as well as in the Balance-sheets as on 31.03.2009 and 31.03.2010. Total deposits found to be made in the said Bank account during the course of financial year 2011-12 were to the tune of Rs. 35,45,270/-. In the assessment completed for A.Y. 2011-12, the said deposits were treated by the Assessing Officer as proceeds of undisclosed sale of the assessee's business and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,286/-, Rs. 32,421/- and Rs. 63,753/- under section 271(1)(c) for A.Ys. 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 respectively. 4. The penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer for A.Ys. 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 was challenged by the assessee in the appeals filed before the ld. CIT(Appeals). There was, however, a delay of 1131 days on the part of the assessee in filing the said appeals for A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11 and 560 days in filing the appeal for A.Y. 2011-12. The assessee also filed applications seeking condonation of the said delay. The ld. CIT(Appeals), however, did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeals of the assessee in limine by treating the same as barred by limitation for the following reasons given in paragraph no. 4 of his impugne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant received a show-cause notice u/s.277 & 276C of Income-tax Act, 1961 on 09/02/2018. Since the appellant's AR suffered from Alzheimer disease, the appellant appointed a new AR. Mr. Swapan Bhawal & Associates (CA firm). In this process, a total of 863 days (01/10/2015 to 09/02/2018) were inadvertently lost A copy of Medical Prescription of Mr. Nripati Ranjan Chakraborty, letter from Sri Nirmalaya Cbakraborty (Advocate), show Cause Notice u/s 277 & 276C & penalty order are attached herewith for your kind perusal. 2. The appellant's new AR. CA Swapan Bhawal, also endorsed the advice of not filling an appeal against penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) and appeared before the Pr. C.IT. Siliguri with his submission against the aforesaid show ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 6. The appellant has sufficiently explained the delay of each day without suppressing any fact. Under the above premises, it is requested that the delay in filing the instant appeal may kindly be condoned, else there will be irreparable injuries and loss to the appellant. For this act of kindness, the appellant, as on duty bound shall ever pray". 6. As further submitted by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, application seeking condonation of delay of 563 days in filing the appeal for A.Y. 2011-12 was also moved by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) on the following grounds:- "1. The appellant did not file an appeal against penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) dated 31/08/2015 issued by the Ld. AO for the AY 2010-11 on the advice of its ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellant had a good chance of getting a favourable order in appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is filed with condonation of delay of 1131 days on 07.11.2018. Again a total of 21 days need for opinion of ld. Advocate, 20 days for supply of papers as required by the ld. Advocate and 29 days required for preparation and filing of appeal with delay condonation for 1131 days (863+119+32+47+21+20+29). 5. The appellant had reposed implicit faith in his advocate Shri Nripati Ranjan Chakraborty and Chartered Accountant Sri Swapan Bhawal and simply proceeded on the presumption that they must have taken appropriate action/properly advised. However, the appellant was wrongly advised (explained in detail above). Therefore, for such wrong action the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for applying liberal principles can be a ground for condoning the delay. It was held that an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken and none should be deprived from adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/appellant authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed in filing of the appeal. Following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Limited -vs.- Nirmala Devi & Others (supra), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani & Another -vs.- DCIT [398 ITR 250] condoned the delay of 2984 days on the part of the assessees in filing their appeals after having found that the assessees had acted bonafide ....