TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the order of the CIT(A). There is no evidence to indicate the date of service of the order of CIT(A) to the assessee. Perusal of Form No.35 filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) that the address for service has been given as the assessee's address as given in the appeal before the Tribunal. On scrutiny of the CIT(A) folder, it appears that immediately after the date of the order of the CIT(A), the order was dispatched. Therefore, the date of service of the impugned order of the assessee has to be construed as in the first week of December, 2017. In fact, in Form No.36 filed before the Tribunal, the assessee has left the date of service of the impugned order as December, 2020, without specifying any date. Be that as it may, the delay in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee's claim for deduction under section 10(37) of the Act to the extent of Rs. 31,57,473/- was denied by the AO for Assessment Year 2012-13 dated 30.09.2016 was revised by the CIT(A) under section 263 of the Act by an order dated 26.11.2019. Pursuant to the said order under section 263 of the Act, an Order of Assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act was passed by the AO on 26.11.2019 and in that order, the exemption under section 54B of the Act withdrawn by the AO. 4. It appears that Shri. Ramakrishna Reddy, CA, who was handling the case of the assessee died and his children referred the case of the assessee to one Shri. Shiva Prakash, CA. In so far Assessment Year 2012-13 is concerned, it appears that the assessee availed of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant that the Id. CIT(A) has dismissed appeal partly erroneously and the same has to be appealed before ITAT along with condonation of delay, and only thereby the Appellant can apply either for Vivad se vishwas or contest the case (in case the scheme is denied). Hence the present application for condonation of delay. 6. It has been submitted that appellant-petitioner were under bona-fide belief that the date for hearing is not fixed and the matter has not yet posted for further hearing/ or already appealed before this Honourable Tribunal (and completely relied on previous AR). Further the erstwhile CA has attained lotus feet, and the assessee was under impression there is only one appeal (and not two years), being compensation on single....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....delay is to be exercised discretely. Condoning the long delay in routine in a mechanical manner and is not a good practice. 9. We have carefully considered the application for condonation of delay. The first point which we notice is that the assessee is an agriculturist and a former aged about 70 years. He cannot be expected to be conversant with the legal and tax compliance. The assessee's land has been compulsorily acquired by the government for a public purpose. The assessee wants to claim relief in respect of enhanced compensation which he received in Assessment Year 2013-14. The impugned order of the CIT(A) is dated 30.11.2017 and as we have already observed, the same has been dispatched to the assessee in due course by the office of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice should prevail over technical considerations. The Court has also explained that a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging the appeal late. The Court has also explained that every day's delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be taken. The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense and pragmatic manner. In the case of Shakuntala Hegde, L/R of R.K. Hegde v. ACIT, ITA No.2785/Bang/2004 for the A.Y. 1993-94, the Hon'ble Tribunal condoned the delay of about 1331 days in filing the appeal wherein the plea of delay in filing appeal due to advice given by a new counsel was accepted as sufficient. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. ISRO Satellite Centre, ITA No. 532/2008 dated 28.1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he AO, the assessee did not establish there was residential house which was compulsorily acquired by BMRCL. Besides the above, the Revenue authorities also took the view that under section 45(5)(b) of the Act, additional compensation / enhanced compensation is taxable in the year in which the same is received by an assessee. According to the Revenue authorities, deduction under section 54 of the Act cannot be claimed on enhanced compensation and such deduction can be claimed only when capital gain arises out of original compensation received by an assessee. In our opinion, this reason given by the Revenue authorities is not acceptable because section 45(5)(b) of the Act only mentions that enhanced compensation is chargeable to tax in the ye....