TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 168
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erred in law in rejecting delay Condon application filed by the appellant which has not been done in right perspective therefore, considering the totality of facts, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2. That your appellant reserve right to amend/ alter/ modify any ground or grounds during the pendency of the appeal. That your appellant shall ever prays for justice." 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act was passed by the Assessing Officer on 24-12-2018 and the same was served on the assessee on 03-01-2019. However, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts of the appeal under consideration and contention of the appellant. It is noticed that the appeal is filed late by 49 days. The facts mentioned in the condonation of delay is vague for the reason that on verification of assessment records, it is noticed that the appellant received the order u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 on 03.01.209. The contention of the appellant that he was misguided by the Chartered accountant is not supported with any evidence has not tenable. It is well settled law that delay in filing the appeal can be condoned if there is a reasonable and sufficient cause which prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. In the instant case, the appellant failed to show any reasonable or sufficient cause which has p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alt with the reasons submitted by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal, and why in the instant facts delay should not be condoned. The ld. CIT(A) simply brushed aside the reasons filed by the assessee for delay in filing appeal, by stating "the appellant has taken the vague and unsupported plea for the delay and which is not verifiable from the records. The appellant has not submitted any evidence either along with the appeal or during appellate proceedings". The ld. CIT(A) did not specifically point out any mala-fide intention on part of the assessee which could be attributed to the delay in filing the appeal. Moreover, we also note that even if the application for condonation of delay in filing appeal is rejected, even then the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....echnical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so. 6. The Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy 2008 (228) ELT 162, while condoning the delay of 883 days in filing an application for setting aside the ex parte decree held "That the purpose of Limitation Act was not to destroy the rights. It is founded on public policy fixing a life span for the legal remedy for the general welfare. The primary function of a Court is to adjudicate disputes between the parties and to advance substantial justice. The time limit fixed for approaching the Court in different situations is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transform into a good cause. The object of providing legal remed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Officer. The appeal against the said order was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of more than 6 months. The assessee explained that the delay was on account of earthquake and ill health of his wife coupled with change of his address due to certain family dispute. The Commissioner (Appeals), however, rejected the explanation of the assessee on the ground that the reasons were very general in nature and did not explain specifically as to why the delay had occurred. On second appeal, ITAT held the Courts and the quasi-judicial bodies are empowered to condone the delay if a litigant satisfies the court that there were sufficient reasons for availing the remedy after expiry of the limitation. Such reasoning should be to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is ill health caused delay in filing Miscellaneous Application against ex parte order passed on account of non-prosecution, keeping in view of rule 24 of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 1963, delay in filing Miscellaneous Application was to be condoned. 10. In the case of Kashmir Road Lines v. DCIT 2021] 123 taxmann.com 5 (Amritsar - Trib.), ITAT held that where assessee claimed condonation of delay of 124 days in filing appeal due to reason that appeal papers were prepared and handed over to Assistant of assessee's counsel for filling who failed to do so and ultimately appeal was filed belatedly through another local counsel and such contention was also supported by affidavit of previous counsel, since assessee had demonstrated bona fi....