TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 1553
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g of the present appeal. 3. Shri S.R. Rao, the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short, 'AR) for the assessee took us through the application of the assessee, which is supported by an "affidavit" dated 13.10.2023, stating as under: "(a) That the applicant was deriving income from truck plying business and filed return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 on 29/07/2009 declaring total income at Rs.1,43,369/-. (b) That the Id. Assessing Officer completed the assessment on 31/05/2013 ex-parte u/s.144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and assessed total income at Rs.24,79,055/-. (c) That aggrieved by the ex-parte Assessment order, applicant filed appeal before Id. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- 1, Raipur on 10/01/2015. (d) That subsequently, when the appeal was fixed for hearing the applicant was represented through his counsel and written submission was also filed. (e) That some criminal proceedings were framed against him and the charges were confirmed by the learned Sessions Court and aggrieved by said order the applicant filed appeal before the Hon'ble Chhattisgarh High Court, wherein the conviction was reduced subject to payment of fine ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his favour as substantial relief was granted in other similarly situated cases by Hon'ble Tribunal and the Ld. CIT(A). In view of above facts and circumstances it is humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to condone the delay, if any and admit the appeal for adjudication in the interest of justice. An affidavit in support of application is enclosed herewith as Annexure-4." 4. The Ld. AR, elaborating on the reasons leading to the delay in filing the present appeal, submitted that some criminal charges were framed against the assessee, which, thereafter, were confirmed by the Ld. Session Court. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee had thereafter approached the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, wherein his conviction was reduced vide order dated 15/01/2020 in Criminal Appeal No. 337 of 2002. Elaborating further, the Ld. A.R. submitted that during the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the assessee had remained on bail. The Ld. A.R further mentioned that the assessee had been facing prosecution proceedings since 2013, and in order to avoid serious threats that he was receiving from the opposite parties, he had remained away from his hometown. The Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the filing of the present appeal does not merit to be condoned and the appeal be dismissed as being barred by limitation. 7. I have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by the Ld. AR to drive home his contentions as regards the delay involved in filing the present appeal. 8. Before proceeding any further, I may herein observe that there is no substance in the claim of the assessee that he had received the order of the CIT(Appeals), dated 24.03.2015, only as on 22.12.2022, i.e., after more than 7 ½ years. Although it is the claim of the assessee that he, due to the aforesaid compelling circumstances, had remained away from his house at Shanti Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District: Bastar, but at the same time, I find that he had stated in his application that the notice from the office of the Tax Recovery Officer, Raipur was received by his Permanent Servant, viz. Shri. Manoj Kashyap s/o Mammbodh Kashyap, Veer Sawarkar Ward, Jagdalpur, who, thereafter, had delivered the same to Shri. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... apparent from the application read a/w. "affidavit" filed by the assessee that he had, without any justifiable reason, delayed preferring the present appeal by 8 years (approx.). Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances under consideration, I am of the view that as there is an inordinate delay of 8 years (approx.) involved in the filing of the captioned appeal, for which the assessee had failed to come forth with any justifiable reason, therefore, as stated by the Ld. DR and, rightly so, the same does not merit to be condoned. The assessee has not given any genuine reason for the delay in filing the captioned appeal either in his application seeking condonation of delay and the "affidavit" filed before me; or in the course of hearing of the appeal. All that the Ld. A.R had tried to canvass before me the unawareness of the assessee about the fact that the CIT(Appeals)-1, Raipur, had disposed off his appeal vide his order dated 24.03.2015, for the reason that at the relevant point of time, there were criminal cases pending against the assessee due to which he had remained unavailable in his hometown pursuant to directions of the Court, which claim of the assessee does....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... I may herein observe that in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Administrator Howrah 1972 AIR SC 749, the Hon'ble Apex Court had held that the expression "sufficient cause" should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice, particularly when there is no motive behind the delay. The expression "sufficient cause" will always have relevancy to reasonableness. The action that the court can condone should fall within the realm of normal human conduct or the normal conduct of a litigant. However, as observed by us hereinabove, as the assessee appellant in the present case had failed to come forth with any genuine bonafide reasons leading to the inordinate delay of 8 years (approx.) involved in filing the present appeal, there can be no reason to allow his application and condone the same. 13. Also, I may herein draw support from a "Third Member" decision of the Tribunal, in the case of Jt. CIT Vs. Tractors and Farm Equipments Ltd. (2007) 104 ITD 149 (Chennai), wherein a fine distinction was drawn between normal delay and inordinate delay. It was held as under: "A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case wher....