TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 1427
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e sake of convenience, shall take up the ITA No. 2952/Mum/2023 for A.Y 2014-15 as lead case and facts narrated. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal 1. Delay not condoned The learned CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before him without appreciating that the appellant had a bona fide reason which caused delay in filing the appeal. Relief claimed The delay in filing the appeal before CIT (A) be condoned. 2 No disposal of First Appeal on merits The learned CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in not disposing of the appeal on merits. 3 Order of ITO wrongfully confirmed The learned CIT (A) erred in law and on facts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and ruling of AAR and Finally made the addition of Rs. 4,59,506/-and assessed the total income of Rs. 14,24,260/- and passed the order u/s 147 r.w.s 144C(3) of the Act dated 28.04.2022. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A),whereas the CIT (A) has issued notice and there was compliance by the assessee and there was delay of 21 days in filling the appeal and the CIT (A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT (A) has not considered the facts that the assessee has received the A.O order and has filed the appeal before ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ived from the Department. Therefore, the appellant claims that he never received Assessment Order in his mail box, we yet submit that it is his unfamiliarity with the tax procedures that may have made the assessment order escape his attention. 2. While surfing the I.T. Portal and particularly the appellant's account, we noticed a notice dated 15th June, 2022. A copy of the said letter is enclosed. This letter brought to our notice that Assessment Order was passed on 28 April, 2022. 3. Therefore, we searched the appellant's account on e-portal, and under the section, "E- Proceedings", under minor head "For your Information", found the Assessment Order. 4. Thus, it was the letter of recovery that alerted us ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n proper perspective to the obtaining fact situation. (iii) Substantial justice being paramount and pivotal the technical considerations should not be given undue and uncalled for emphasis. (iv) No presumption can be attached to deliberate cause of delay but, gross negligence on the part of the counsel or litigant is to be taken note of. (v) Lack of bona fides imputable to a party seeking condonation of delay is a significant and relevant fact. (vi) It is to be kept in mind that adherence to strict proof should not affect public justice and cause public mischief because the courts are required to be vigilant so that in the ultimate eventuate there is no real failure of justice. (vii) The concept ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hould be given some acceptable latitude." 8. The Hon'ble supreme court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji & others (167 ITR 471) (SC) has observed as under : "The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting s. 5 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on "merits". The expression "sufficient cause" 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-that being the life purpose of the existence of the institution of Courts. The doctrine of equality before law demands that all litigants, including the State as a....