TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 2346
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s case dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the delay of 540 days in filing of the appeal is not explained. The assessee submitted that he was not properly advised by the tax practitioner, Shri Amal Krishna Mondal, who had received the order. The ld. CIT(A) was of the view that reason cannot be considered a reasonable cause for condonation of delay. 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri K.M. Roy, relied on number of case-laws and submitted that the ld. CIT(A), should have condoned the delay and adjudicated the appeal on merits for reason that, the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing of the appeal in time as the assessee was not properly advised in the matter. The ld. D/R, relied on the order of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee was a bank employee and not a legal expert to know the niceties of his legal rights. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Kattiji & Othrs. (supra) has held as under :- "The Legislature has conferred power to condone delay by enacting section 5 of the Limitation Act, 196 , in order to enable the courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on merits. The expression "sufficient cause" in section 5 is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner, which subserves the ends of justice - that being the life-purpose of the existence of the institution of courts. A justifiably liberal approach has to be adopted on principle. "Every day's delay must b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xactly one year after the last date of filing of the appeal. When that be so, it is pertinent to point out that actually the filing of the appeal was not done and even after the death of Ashok Kumbat, the assessee had taken more than six months in filing the present appeal. The assessee had neither given any particular or details in the affidavit as on which date the papers were handed over to the counsel for preparing the appeal and on what occasion the assessee enquired about the progress in preparing the appeal and filing the same." Thus, under such circumstances, the Hon'ble High Court held that there was no sufficient reason or cause to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. This decision is not at all applicable in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts delay to be condoned, he should show sufficient cause. If no cause is shown at all, the only conclusion that can be reached is that the delay cannot be condoned, particularly when lack of bona fides is evident." Since assessee did not give any reasonable cause nor any application for condonation of delay, therefore, Tribunal did not condone the delay. This decision is also not applicable to the facts of the case in-as-much as assessee itself had taken a ground before Ld. CIT(A) for condonation of delay and had filed the petition for condonation of delay * Agricultural Market Committee vs. ADIT (Exemptions-1), Hyderabad. In this case there was a delay of 1500 days in filing appeals. The Tribunal while refusing to condone the dela....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d reason for condoning inordinate delays of more than 1500 days for the years under consideration (para 6)". This decision also is of no assistance to revenue because here also the assessee was found to be negligent and failed to prove that he was diligent and was not guilty of negligence whatsoever. In the present case, however, as noted earlier, assessee had pointed out that on account of wrong legal advice it did not file appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee's action of filing 154 petitions before AO indicates assessee's plea that he was not negligent. 9. In view of above discussion, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for deciding the appeal denovo on....