TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 814
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s the "Act"), dated 22.06.2020, for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under: "1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts by disallowing the legitimate claim of depreciation of Rs. 17,62,663/- 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in conforming an addition of Rs 4,992/- which is a duplication of the disallowance already reflected in the assessee's original return of income. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal in limine by not granting us condonation of delay of 100 days. 4. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fect to depreciation amount of Rs. 17,62,663/- in DEP schedule of ITR as it had already claimed the depreciation in its original return. However, disregarding the same, ld. Assessing Officer assessed the total income without giving effect of depreciation claim. Ld. Assessing Officer also added the contributions to recognized provident fund of Rs. 4,992/- which according to him was not offered to tax by the assessee. However, assessee claimed that it had already given the effect of it in its computation of income filed in the original return. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 4. While the assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), at the same time it pursued the matter by filing an application for rectificati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmissions made by the assessee in respect of condonation of delay, ld CIT(A) dismissed it on the grounds of delay though he observed that assessee may pursue rectification application u/s.154 for specific computation errors. In the order so passed by ld. CIT(A), there is no discussion on the merits of the case except for reference to section 249(3) which requires "sufficient cause" for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset prayed for affording one more opportunity to the assessee by restoring the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for meritorious adjudication of the grounds raised at the first appellate stage. He gave an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g of the expression "sufficient cause". Sub-section 3 of Section 249 contemplates that the CIT(A) may admit an appeal after expiry of relevant period, if he is satisfied that there was a "sufficient cause" for not presenting it within that period. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. 5.2. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Krishnamurthy (supra). It reads as under: "Rule of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. Law of limitation fixes a life-span for such legal remedy for the redress of the legal injury so suffered. Time is precious and the wasted time would never revisit. During efflux of time newer causes would sprout up necessitating newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the courts. So a life span must be fixed for each remedy. Unending period for launching the remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e explanation. While condoning delay the Could should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would have incurred quiet a large litigation expenses. It would be a salutary guideline that when courts condone the delay due to laches on the part of the applicant the court shall compensate the opposite party for his loss." 5.4. We do not deem it necessary to re-cite or recapitulate the proposition laid down in other decisions. It is suffice, to say that the Hon'ble Courts are unanimous in their approach to propound that whenever the reasons assigned by an applicant for explaining the delay, then such reasons are to be construed with a justice-oriented approach. 5.5. In light of....