AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1701
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficer (in short 'the AO'). Further, due to fault of the accountant, no compliance was made even before the Ld. CIT(A). Thereafter, the matter was referred to the accountant for filing the second appeal but due to the negligence of the accountant, the present appeal was filed with a delay of 482 days. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had handed over the matter to the accountant in good faith that the appeal will be filed in time. He submitted that the lapse on the part of the accountant constitutes sufficient cause for condonation of delay. He, therefore, prayed to condone the delay in the present matter. 3. Per contra, Sh. R P Rastogi, the Ld. CIT-DR submitted that the explanation of the assessee for the delay does not constitute sufficient cause to condone the delay. He submitted that when the accountant had been negligent before the AO and also before the Ld. CIT(A), which resulted in ex-parte orders, the assessee should have taken precaution to ensure that the present appeal was filed within time. According to the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee cannot escape by merely passing on the blame for the delay on the accountant. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. Before ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sions, explanation & justification before the assessing officer and the assessment has been framed u/s. 144 of the Act. Having gone through the fact, no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if the matter is set aside to the assessing officer for fresh assessment. The appellant shall make due compliance with the notices issued by the authorities. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any of the aforesaid ground or grounds if necessary." 6. As per the provisions of Section 253(5) of the Act, the Tribunal may admit an appeal after expiry of the prescribed period, if it is satisfied that there was 'sufficient cause' for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed period. The order of the CIT(A) was received by the assessee on 22.09.2023 and the due date for filing the present appeal was 22.11.2023. However, the appeal was filed on 21/03/2025 wth a delay of 477 days. The assessee has explained that the delay in filing the present appeal was due to gross negligence of the accountant. The assessee has filed an affidavit of Shri Bankimchandra Ramchandra Vyas, the Secretary of the assessee trust, explaining the reason for delay, which is reproduced below: -....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Commissioner (Appeal) and due to lapse on his part the Commissioner (Appeal) had dismissed the appeal. He had thus only owned the responsibility for non-compliance before the CIT(A) which had resulted in dismissal of the appeal. The accountant has nowhere admitted his lapse for delay in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. 10. In the decision of Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur, [2013] 5 CTC 547, the Supreme Court while dealing with the issue on the delay in filing the appeal, laid down the guidelines and held as under: 15. From the aforesaid authorities the principles that can broadly be culled out are: (i) There should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non- pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are obliged to remove injustice. (ii) The terms "sufficient cause" should be understood in their proper spirit, philosophy and purpose regard being had to the fact that these terms are basically elastic and are to be applied in proper perspective to the obtaining fact- situation. (iii) Substantial justice being....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith careful concern and not in a half hazard manner harbouring the notion that the courts are required to condone delay on the bedrock of the principle that adjudication of a lis on merits is seminal to justice dispensation system. (b) An application for condonation of delay should not be dealt with in a routine manner on the base of individual philosophy which is basically subjective. (c) Though no precise formula can be laid down regard being had to the concept of judicial discretion, yet a conscious effort for achieving consistency and collegiality of the adjudicatory system should be made as that is the ultimate institutional motto. (d) The increasing tendency to perceive delay as a non- serious matter and, hence, lackadaisical propensity can be exhibited in a non-challant manner requires to be curbed, of course, within legal parameters. 11. In the present case, we find that the assessee has been lackadaisical in its approach and it has tried to seek condonation of delay in a nonchalant manner. The gross negligence on the part of the assessee and the lack of bona fides does not make it a fit case for condonation of delay. As held by the Hon'ble Ape....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....N THE CASE OF SHRI KHAMBHAT TALUKA SARVAJANIK KELAVANI MANDAL (PAN-AAATS8864J) AFFIDAVIT OF DEPONANT FOR LATE FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT Most respectfully, the Deponent submits as under: - Before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal In the matter of Shri Khambhat Taluka Sarvajanik Kelavani Mandal for the Assessment Year 2017-18 1. The Deponent Shri Khambhat Taluka Sarvajanik Kelavani Mandal and hence is fully conversant of the facts deposed below: 2. That the deponent received CIT(A)'s order on 22.09.2023. 3. That appeal was to be filed by 22.11.2023. 4. Due to gross negligence of an accountant, an ex-parte assessment order has been passed by assessing officer as well as Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 7. That in this way there is a delay of 482 days which is due to gross negligent of an accountant O ETHU TA. KHAMBHAT DIST. ANAND GUARNI STATE Rope Nia. 44279/25 Exp. OL. 27/02/2030 33 ENT Document 2 ISTATE 1/02/2035 That delay in filing the appeal is because of the gross negligent of an . accountant. TOS VERIFICATION I, Shri Bankimchandra Ramchandra Vyas, the Secretary, deponent do hereby verify t....