2019 (11) TMI 1226

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Income Tax Act [Act] on 30-12-2004. Against the said order of assessment, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) on 08-04-2010 with a delay of 1895 days. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee by sustaining the order of AO without condoning the delay. 2.1. Against the said order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. In this appeal, the assessee has raised as many as 11 Grounds of Appeal. Out of which, Ground Nos.3,4,5 & 6 are related to non-condonation of delay. 4. During the appeal hearing, Ld.AR submitted that the due date for filing of appeal before the CIT(A) was 30-01-2005, against which the appeal was filed on 08-04-2010 and there was delay of 1895 days. The Ld.AR submitted that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....returns of income for the impugned assessment years i.e., AYs.2003- 04 & 2004-05 admitting the cash receipts also from Sri Chaitanya Educational Committee (SCEC) in the relevant assessment years. Having admitted the income in the regular returns for the relevant assessment years and made the addition in the block assessment the same receipt was taxed twice and caused financial injury to the assessee, therefore, requested to condone the delay and allow the appeal of assessee. In this connection, the assessee relied on various decisions for condonation of delay, including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases: i. Union of India Vs. Ibrahim Uddin and others in Civil Appeal No.1374 of 2008, dt.17-07-2012, wherein t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o end for litigation, thus, vehemently opposed for condoning the delay. The Ld.DR taken our attention to para 22 of the order of Hon'ble Apex Court and argued that in the instant case, there is no sufficient and reasonable cause for filing the appeal beyond the time limit allowed under the Act. The Ld.DR also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vama Apparels (India) (P.) Ltd., Vs. ACIT, (2019) [102 taxmann.com 398 (Bombay)], wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that the negligence on the part of the ex-employee is not a reason for condoning of delay. Accordingly argued that there is no case for condoning the delay, hence, he vehemently opposed the condonation of delay. 6. We have heard ....