TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 1927
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal: "1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the CIT (Appeal)-11, Mumbai has grossly erred in upholding fact of the case by dismissing appeal on the ground of findings casual approach of the Appellant in filing appeal to CIT (Appeal) by delay of 3018 days and without giving any opportunity of being head before dismissing appeal. We humbly pray before your goodself to be generous and accept our appeal for condonation of delay and appeal matter should be taken up for hearing. 2. The CIT (Appeal)-11, Mumbai has grossly erred both in law and in upholding facts and circumstances of the case by not adjudicating the proceedings on merit and thereby dismiss the appeal. The appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of sufficient cause is a condition precedent in the exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction." 5.3.2 In the case of Balwant Singh (Dead). Vs. Jagdish Sing, (2010) 8 SCC 685, the Hon'ble Courts held as under: "We may state that even if the term "sufficient cause" has to receive liberal construction, it must squarely fall within the concept of reasonable time and proper conduct of the party concerned." 5.3.3 In the case of Ornate Traders Private Limited Vs. the Income Tax Officer, Mumbai (Bombay HC), the Hon'ble Courts held as under: - "The action which can be condoned by the court should fall within the scope of normal human conduct or normal conduct of a litigant. While Section 5 of the Limitat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ould not be filed before Ld. CIT(A) within prescribed time was that the assessee was not checking the emails regularly and hence was not aware about the demand since all intimations were being sent on his email. On going through the facts of the instant case, we are of the considered view that there has been gross negligence on part of the assessee in not filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee has given no cogent reason as to why there was such an inordinate delay in filing of appeal. In our view, the assessee has not given any reason as to why the assessee was not checking the status of his email, especially in light of the fact that the assessee had in regularly file returns of income for the subsequent assessment years as well.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to be dismissed. In the case of Amit Cotton Industries [2022] 136 taxmann.com 328 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay of 520 days in filing special leave petition cannot be condoned without satisfactory explanation and hence, dismissed. In the case of Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd.[2007] 104 ITD 149 (Chennai) (TM), the ITAT held that where assessee justified delay of 310 days in filing appeal before Tribunal by stating that Commissioner (Appeals)'s order was misplaced and forgotten and when same was found while sorting out unwanted papers, steps were taken for preparation of appeal, the delay in filing of appeal before Tribunal could not be condoned as same was due to negligence and inaction on part of assessee and assessee....