TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 646
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vant to the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. At the outset, it was noticed that there was a delay of 874 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ITAT. 3. The assessee has filed the affidavit explaining the reason for the delay in filing the appeal. It was submitted that the order of the CIT(A) was handed over to the staff namely Shri Dinesh Desai who left the organization as the assessee was facing severe financial crises. In fact, the assessee could not repay the money borrowed from Visnagar Co-operative Bank for which the case is pending before the Metropolitan Court. In view of the above, the ld. AR requested that there was sufficient and reasonable cause which prevented the assessee in filing the appeal before the ITAT. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor so the case calls for a more cautious approach but in the latter case no such consideration may arise and such a case deserves a liberal approach. No hard and fast rule can be laid down in this regard. The Court has to exercise the discretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression 'sufficient cause', the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance." (p. 799) 4. The Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Orissa Concrete & Allied Industries Ltd.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rime importance and the expression "sufficient cause" should receive a liberal construction. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Appellate Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay in filing the appeal, considering the reasons given by the assessee for the delay." 6.1 From the above, it is clear that the expression "sufficient cause" should be interpreted to advance substantial justice. Therefore, advancement of substantial justice is the prime factor while considering the reasons for condoning the delay. 6.2 We also note that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti Vs. CIT reported in 276 ITR 165 has held as under: 18. The position is, therefore, that, regardless of whether the revised return was fil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1981 dated 20-8-1981], has laid down the approach that the authorities must adopt in such matters in the following terms: "The Supreme Court has observed in numerous decisions, including Ramlal v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 361, State of West Bengal v. Administrator, Howrah Municipality AIR 1972 SC 749 and Babutmal Raichand Oswal v. Laxmibai R. Tarte AIR 1975 SC 1297, that the State authorities should not raise technical pleas if the citizens have a lawful right and the lawful right is being denied to them merely on technical grounds. The State authorities cannot adopt the attitude which private litigants might adopt." 6.3 From the above it is revealed that the income of the assessee should not be over assessed even there....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....outset, we note that the requirement of filing appeal before the learned CIT (A) in electronic form was new. The assessee being individual filed appeal before CIT(A) within time limit but in paper dated 18th April 2016 instead of filing online as required by the CBDT notification dated 1st March 2016. In this regard we are of the view that the filing of appeal in electronic mode is a procedural requirement and any failure to comply with procedural requirement cannot be made hindrance in affording justice. The assessee who filed appeal within the time limit in paper form in our considered cannot be deprived of justice merely for the reason to comply with newly brought procedural requirement. In holding so, we find support and guidance from t....