TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 564
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mis-reporting of income as a consequence of under reporting of income in terms of provisions of Section 270A(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. The appeal is delayed for filing by 338 days. The assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay stating as under: "1. That the appellant has filed the accompanying appeal under section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of CIT (A) dated 24th April, 2024. 2. That the appeal was required to be filed on or before 23rd June, 2024 but due to unavoidable circumstances, it could not be filed within the prescribed time limit, resulting in a delay of 344 days. 3.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4) 2 SCC 389, the Supreme Court stated that justice must be done on merits rather than be denied on technicalities such as limitation. In Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa (1969) 2 SCC 627, the Hon'ble Court recognized that procedural delays should not override the right to be heard, especially when there is no malafide intention. 5. That the appellant, therefore, prays that the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits in the interest of justice." 3. The Ld. DR, however, objected to the condonation of delay stating that the delay was substantial. 4. Having heard both the parties, we find that the assessee has demonstrated sufficient cause for the del....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l justice deserves to be preferred. It has also been noted that there is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence. A litigant doesn't stand to benefit by resorting to delay. We make a reference in this regard to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, 1987 AIR 1353. 6. In view of the above therefore, noting that the assessee has adduced sufficient cause for the delay in filing the present appeal before us, we consider it to be a fit case for condoning the delay in the interest of justice. The delay of 338 days in the filing of the present appeal is accordingly condoned. 7. The solitary issue for our consideration is the lev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fall under any of the sub-clauses mentioned in Section 270A(9) of the Act so as to justify the levy of penalty in terms of the said Section on the assessee. 9. The facts of the case are that the assessee had claimed deduction of capital gains earned u/s. 54F of the Act by making investment in a new property and when doing so had claimed deduction to the extent of the entire investment made on acquiring a new house property amounting to Rs.1,17,92,358/-. As per the AO, the assessee was entitled to deduction / exemption u/s. 54 of the Act only on a proportionate basis. The capital gain earned by it being eligible for deduction in proportion to the amount of sale consideration received by it which was invested in acquiring a new asset. Acco....