COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

At the outset it was brought to our notice that the appeals filed by the assesse are barred by limitation by 226 days. After hearing the rival contentions of both the sides on the admission of appeals for adjudication ,we observe that the delay is caused due to the illness of the Chief Executive Officer of the company who was looking after the tax matters of the assesse company. After perusal of the affidavit filed by Chief Executive Officer Shri Pavitra Mundra, it is apparent that the appeal could not 2 to 772/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2015 -16 Comantra E-Solutions Pvt. Ltd. filed in time due to the fact that the notices of hearing were sent through e-mail online which could not be seen resulting into passing of ex-parte orders by ld CIT(A) on 16.3.2022 which too was sent on the email of the assesse. Thereafter the accountant of the assesse came to know about the passing of appellate order in the month of December,2022 and thereafter immediately the issue of filing of the appeal was referred to Shri Subhash Aggarwal who filed the appeal on 20.12.2022.It was also stated that due to Covid 19 pandemic the operations of the assesses were disrupted and office was not opened regularly thereafter even. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 of the Act contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression "sufficient cause" employed in this Section has also been used identically in sub- Section 3 of Section 249 of the Act, which provides power to the Id. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this expression has fallen for consideration before the Hon'ble High Courts as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court then, the Hon'ble Courts were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression has to be construed liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, 1987 AIR 1353 wherein it has been held that substantial justice must prevail over technicalities. In view of the above facts we are of the considered view that there was a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within due time and therefore the delay is condoned.

The only issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of late filing fee u/s 234E in all these appeals by Ld. CIT(A) as levied by the AO, CPC, TDS for late filing of return.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order on the ground that the appeal was filed belatedly by 921 days and 3 to 772/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2015 -16 Comantra E-Solutions Pvt. Ltd. there was no proper explanation by the assessee nor any condonation was made and thus the appeal is dismissed in liminie. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met if these appeals are decided on merit by the Ld. CIT(A).. Accordingly we restore the issue back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to decide the condonation of delay and also decide the issue on merit and the assessee is also directed to file proper condonation petition with properly explaining the reasons for the delay with supporting evidences. Accordingly, all these appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 21st April, 2023