2024 (10) TMI 235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... time barred by 243 days. In order to explain the delay, Shri Subrata Das, Secretary of the assessee-Trust has filed an affidavit dated 27.03.2024. The stand of the Secretary, assessee-Trust is that the erstwhile Secretary Shri Mohan Chatterjee, aged about 78 years is unable to move his arms due to old age and unable to checked the departmental communication in time and lack of communication with him due to his old age as well as not accustomed to use e- mail and other electronic devices, the appeal could not be filed within the due time and prayed before the Tribunal for condoning the delay of 243 days. 3. We find merit in the contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee and are of the view that there was sufficient reason, for which ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. 5. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact he runs a serious risk. 6. I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....kept alive for a legislatively fixed period of time. A court knows that refusal to condone delay would result foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumption that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi lain Vs. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575] and State of West Bengal Vs. The Administrator, Howrah Municipality [ AIR 1972 SC 749]. It must be remembered that in every case of delay there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the appeal before this Tribunal within the statutory time limit. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we condone the said delay of 243 days and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. 7. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Exemption) erred in rejecting the application of the assessee filed in Form 10AB for final approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 8. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the application filed by the assessee was rejected on account of being barred by limitation. The assessee furnished application on 01.11.2022, but ld. CIT (Exemption) has treated it as non-maintainable since the extended due date of CBDT was only 30th September, 2022. Ld. Counsel f....