2026 (7) TMI 410

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o as "the Act") for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2015-16. 2. The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee pertaining to the A.Y. 2015-16 with ITA No.582/Kol/2026 arising out of intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, dated 29.10.2016 and ITA No.581/Kol/2026 has been arising out of rectification order u/s 154 of the Act, dated 20.11.2019. ITA No.582/Kol/2026 (A.Y. 2015-16): 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee being a company, filed its return of income at Rs. Nil. The Central Processing Centre (In short, 'CPC') has processed the tax return intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act has been issued and, in the intimation, the Assessing Officer (In short, 'the AO') has reduced the deduction eligible from Rs. 1,33,38,573/- and the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(A) ought to condone the delay as there was no intentional delay in filing the appeal rather it was due to the bonafide manner by taking recourse of section 154 of the Act. The ld. AR submits that the time taken in disposing the application u/s 154 of the Act was beyond the control of the assessee and ld. CIT(A) ought to have been excluded the same. The prayer of the ld. AR is that appeal of the assessee is remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(A) after condoning the delay with a direction to pass order on merits. The ld. AR, further submits that no adjustment can be made in intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, if the issue is debatable. The ld. AR placed following decisions before us, viz., (i) Mool Chandra vs. UOI (2025) 1 SCC 625, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion nor want of bona fides is imputable to the appellant." In N.Balakrishnan v. M.Krishnamurthy [1998 (7) SCC 123], this Court held: 5."It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to a want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay of a very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. Once the court accepts the explanation as sufficient, it is the result of positive....