TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 1504
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) is not justified in upholding the penalty order which is illegal, bad-in-law and without jurisdiction as penalty proceedings was barred by limitation as prescribed u/s. 275(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has erred in confirming imposition of penalty of Rs. 31,00,000/- under section 271 D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for which there is no satisfaction recorded in the assessment order. 4. The impugned order is bad in law and on facts. 5. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter or omit all or any of the grounds of appeal in the interest of justice. 3. At the very beginning of the hearing in the present case, it was pointed out by the registry that the appeal under consideration is barred by limitation, which is filed with delay by 371 days. When the defect was confronted to the Ld. AR, he placed before us an application along with affidavit of the assessee stating the reasons for delay, that order of Ld. CIT(A) was uploaded on the Income Tax portal on 20.03.2023, however, the employee of the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed application for condonation of delay along with affidavit, explaining the reasons. 7. The appellant prays that the delay may kindly be condoned for following grounds :- a) Lack of Knowledge of the Order: The appellant did not receive any formal communication regarding the passing of the order. It was only while downloading form 26AS for F.Y.2023-24 appellant came to know of this order. b) Losing track of the matter is attributable to change of physical hearing to Faceless hearing of appeals: The first appeal was filed on 22/04/2017 and after advent of Faceless Appeal Scheme 2021, the entire appeal hearing mechanism has been changed. The counsel who was attending all compliances up to assessment stage has engaged another counsel for. appeals and due to dropping of notices on e-filing portal and for want of physical notices, appellant could not keep track of the developments. c) Non-receipt of any notice for penalty/recovery even after passing of order u/s. 250: The appellant did not receive any order giving appeal effect/recovery notice, etc. after passing of the order, which has contributed to further delay. As per provisions of sec. 244A (1A) and order of Hon'ble De....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t if the delay is explained satisfactorily and the discretion is exercised in a judicious manner, the delay should be condoned in the interest of justice. 6. Ram Nath Sao alias Ram Nath Sahu & Ors. v. Gobardhan Sao. & Ors. (2002) 3 SCC 195: The Supreme Court reiterated that a liberal approach should be taken in matters of condonation, especially when the delay is not due to the appellant's malafide conduct. 7. Rafiq & Anr. v. Munshilal & Anr. (1981) 2 SCC 788: The Supreme Court observed that the party should not suffer for the fault of their counsel, emphasizing that the judiciary should adopt a lenient approach. 8. Vedabai @ Vijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil (2001) 9 SCC 106: It was held that in matters of condonation of delay, a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach should be adopted. 9. Improvement Trust, Ludhiana v. Ujagar Singh (2010) 6 SCC 786: Although not specifically related to Income tax, the Supreme Court in this case emphasized that the expression "sufficient cause" should be ensure that justice is done. This principle is equally applicable to income tax appeals before the Tribunal. 10. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Iswhar Singh ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DCIT (2015) 68 SOT 16 (Mumbai - Trib.): The ITAT Mumbai Bench held that the Tribunal is empowered to condone the delay in filing an appeal if the appellant shows sufficient cause. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of substantial justice and stated that technicalities should not prevent the adjudication of a matter on its merits. 19. People Education and Economic Development Society (FEEDS) v. ITO (100 ITD 87) (Chennai) (TM) Learned Tribunal has condoned more than six hundred days delay. 20. CIT vs. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadai and Ors. (153 ITR 596) The Court has considered the condonation of delay and held that there was sufficient and reasonable cause on the part of the assessee for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation. Accordingly, the Madras High Court condoned nearly 21 years of delay in filing the appeal 21. Sreenivas Charitable Trust (280 ITR 357) (Mad) held that no hard and fast rule can be laid down in the matter of condonation of delay and the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach and the Court should exercise their discretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression "sufficient cause" the principle of advan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in order to impart justice. In view of the above facts, circumstances of the case and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra), the delay in filing appeal by the appellant Society is condoned and appeal is admitted for the decision on merits. 28. Vinod Premjibhai Gangani Versus The Acit (Osd), Ward - 3 (2) (3), Surat- 2024 (4) TMI 588 - ITAT Surat Delay in filling appeals - delays of 160 days in filing present appeal - HELD THAT :- The assessee is not likely to get any benefit in filing the appeals belatedly, rather there is always chance that such delay not be condoned. Considering the submission of Ld. AR for the assessee, wherein he has fairly accepted that he could not logged on the ITBA portal due to frequent changing in password by regular CA of assessee. We find that assessee has reasonably explained the cause of delay of 160 days, hence, the delay in the appeal is condoned 29. 2024 (3) TMI 99 - ITAT DEHRADUN Saraswati Shishu Mandir, Rudrapur, c/o. Matta Garg & Co vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC assessee has filed a delay condonation petition adducing reason that it being an educational institution running a small school and providing education to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal Faceless Appeal Scheme and Judiciary acknowledges challenges and technical issues faced by taxpayers due to the new scheme. e) Consideration of appellant's bona fide reasons is important for delivering substantial justice. f) Emphasis is on deciding cases on their merits rather than dismissing on technical grounds. g) Hon'ble ITAT has the discretionary power to condone delays in filing appeals and is encouraged to adopt a liberal and justice-oriented approach. h) In fact Hon'ble Tribunals have consistently adopted a liberal approach in condoning delays. i) The objective ensures that taxpayers are not unfairly prejudiced due to procedural changes under the new scheme. j) Justice and fairness principles are maintained despite procedural and technical difficulties. 5. To decide whether the appeal of the assessee is maintainable or not on account of delay in filing of the appeal, the issue is confronted to the Senior Departmental Representative (in short "Sr. DR"), against which Ld. Sr. DR had strongly opposed the condonation of delay requested by the assessee, stating that in the present case delay involved is inordinate i.e., 371 days, there was no plausi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he explanations by the assessee's in the earlier cases before the tribunal, we do not see any reason to decide the matter of condonation of delay in the present case differently than the same were decided in its earlier orders. Under such facts and circumstances, the request of the assessee for seeking condonation of delay stands rejected. 8. The aforesaid aspect has been dealt with at length by the SMC Bench of this ITAT, Raipur in the case of Satish Kumar Agrawal vs. ITO-2(1) in ITA No. 53/RPR/2024 dated 23.04.2024, wherein the observations of the tribunal are as under: 14. I shall now deal with the judgments/orders as had been pressed into service by the Ld.AR in his attempt to support his contention that the delay involved in filing of the appeal be condoned, as under: (A) Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs. ACIT (2019) taxmann.com 134 (SC) In the case before the Hon'ble Apex Court the revenue had not refuted the claim of the assessee raised that it had no knowledge of the passing of the order by the Tribunal dated 29.12.20 until June 2008, which, thus, had resulted in a delay of 1754 days in filing of the appeal before the Hon'ble High Court. Unlike the facts invo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herein the bonafide of the assessee was neither in any clout of doubt nor refuted by the department that the delay involved in filing the appeal was condoned by the Tribunal. However, in the present case before me, I am afraid that not only the explanation of the assessee that the delay in filing the appeal had occasioned due to his ill health is not supported by any evidence proving the same, but rather his non-cooperative conduct before the ower authorities does not inspire any confidence as regards the veracity of the reason given by him to explain the delay involved. In fact, Ld. D.R. had objected to the seeking of condonation of delay by the assessee on the ground that the same had occasioned due to a lackadaisical approach adopted by the assessee. (D) Sandhya Mallick Vs. ITO (2022) 220 TTJ 403 (CTK-Trib) The Tribunal in the aforesaid case before them, had observed that the appeal before them was delayed by the assessee due to inaction on the part of his counsel. The Tribunal had observed that the assessee had learned about the order of the CIT(Appeals) only when she was called upon to explain why penalty may not be imposed upon her regarding the additions/disallowances ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sition Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others (supra), the same being distinguishable on facts as against those involved in the captioned appeal before me, thus, would not assist his case. The Hon'ble Apex Court, stressing upon considering a "sufficient cause" by the Courts, while deciding as to whether the delay involved in the filing of the appeal merits to be condoned, had observed that the said term employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which subserves the ends of justice which is the life purpose of existence of the institution of courts. At the same time, the Hon'ble Apex Court had, while observing that the courts should do even-handed 2024 justice on merits in preference to the approach that scuttles a decision on merits, had inter alia, held that an appeal or any application may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period. For the sake of clarity, the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court are culled out as follows: "1. Any appeal or any application, o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndonation of the delay in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. For the sake of clarity, the observations of the Hon'ble High Court are culled out as under: "9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 10. From perusal of the documents available on record, it transpires that as per the information obtained from the Annual Information Return, it was observed by the AO that though the assessee made cash deposits of Rs. 34,67,700/- in his savings bank account during the year under consideration but had not filed his return of income. As the assessee failed to come forth with any explanation as regards the source of the aforesaid cash deposits, the AO reopened his case under Section 147 of the Act. During the course of the assessment proceedings, though the AO had issued several notices to the assessee but he did not comply with the same. Accordingly, the AO vide his order passed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act dated 16.12.2018, determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 34,67,700/- after treating the entire amount of cash deposits of Rs. 34,67,700/- as the assessee's unexplained money under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 34,67,700/- in his bank account as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act, thus, upheld the order passed by the AO under Sections 144/147 of the Act, dated 16.12.2018. 12. In the course of the proceedings before the Tribunal, the conduct of the assessee remains the same as was there before the learned CIT(A) and the A.O. The appeal filed by the assessee before the learned ITAT involves a delay of 166 days. On a careful perusal of the facts leading to the delay in filing of the present appeal, the reason that the bonafides of the reasons leading to the delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee cannot be gathered from the application filed by the assessee seeking condonation of the delay involved in filing the appeal. The facts that can be gathered from the aforesaid application of the assessee are, viz. (i) the assessment order was passed by the A.O on 16.12.2018 and was issued on 29.12.2018 without any reasons for keeping the same with him; (ii) reasons recorded under Section 148(2) of the Act were not supplied to the assessee by the A.O; and (iii) appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the CIT(Appeals) vide an exparte order dated 29.03.2023 etc. 13. Under se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m of normal human conduct or normal conduct of a litigant. However, as the assessee appellant in the present case is habitually acting in defiance of law, where he had not only delayed in filing of the present appeal but also had adopted a lackadaisical approach and not participated in the course of the proceedings before the CIT(A), therefore, there can be no reason to allow his application and condone the substantial delay of 166 days involved in preferring of the captioned appeal. Now, when in the present appeal the appellant / assessee had failed to come forth with any good and sufficient reason that would justify condonation of the substantial delay involved in preferring of the captioned appeal, we hereby dismiss the present appeal upholding the reasons assigned by the learned ITAT. 16. Resultantly, this appeal stands dismissed." Also, the Hon'ble High Court of Chattisgarh in its order passed in the case of M/s BPS Infrastructure Vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Raipur, Tax Case No, 87 of 2024, dated 12.04.2024, after relying on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in State Of West Bengal Vs. Administrator, Howrah, reported in 1972 AIR SC 749 and Ramlal, Motilal, and Chotelal Vs.....