TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1277
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeals:- "1. The learned C.I.T(Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not condoning the delay of only 5 days in filing appeal before him by the Appellant. It is submitted that there was reasonable cause on the part of the Appellant in filing the appeal before the learned C.I.T(Appeals) late by 5 days and the same should have been condoned. It is submitted that it be so held now and the order passed by the learned C.I.T.(Appeals) rejecting the appeal in limine be quashed in this regard. 2. The learned C.I.T.(Appeals) grossly erred in law and on facts in not admitting the appeal and not adjudicating the appeal on the merits of the case and erred i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of order of Hon'ble Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad. The assessee was advised by his consultant to file compounding application, which was filed before Principal CCIT on 03.12.2021. However, the Principal CCIT rejected the compounding application vide order dated 12.01.2022. It was owing to the aforesaid circumstances that there was a delay of 1976 days in filing of the present appeal before ITAT. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in view of the facts mentioned above, it is a fit case for condonation of delay in filing of the present appeal, since there was no mala fide intention on part of the assessee in delay in filing of the present appeal. In response, the Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. If the explanation given does not smack mala fides or is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....han 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 satisfaction of the Court. In the instant case, on account of earthquake and ill health of his wife, the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n-prosecution, keeping in view of rule 24 of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 1963, delay in filing Miscellaneous Application was to be condoned. 3.6 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 fide reason and sufficient cause for such delay, same was to be condoned. 3.7 In our considered view, look....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proceedings, wherein it was submitted that the assessee was running / operating a total of five firms from the same premises. At the time of survey, wherein the case of M/s. Pankaj Textiles, there was an excess stock of Rs. 4,44,012/- but this was due to the fact in physical accounting, stock belonging to M/s. Mahek Impex and M/s. Sonal Fabrics was, by mistake included in the stock of M/s. Pankaj Textile. Therefore, while there was an excess in physical stock of M/s. Pankaj Textile, there was a shortage in the case of M/s. Mahek Impex and M/s. Sonal Fabrics, and therefore, there was no overall excess in physical stock. However, while framing the assessment, this aspect was not considered by the Assessing Officer and he made addition of Rs.....