GIRISHBHAI SAKARCHAND SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WD-42(1)(2), MUMBAI

At the outset, we notice that there is a delay of 468 days in filing the appeal before us. In this regard, the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the delay.

We have heard counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record, as well as the affidavit filed by the assessee explaining the delay. Considering the entire factual position as explained before us, the fact that the assessee is a senior citizen suffering from age-related ailments, and keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [1987 AIR 1353 (SC)]—wherein it was held that when substantial justice is pitted against technicalities of non-deliberate delay, substantial justice must be preferred—we are of the view that the cause of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Therefore, considering the explanation put forth by the assessee and construing the expression "sufficient cause" liberally, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal before us, subject to a cost of Rs. 10,000/-. This amount shall be deposited into the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund, and a copy of the receipt shall be placed on record before the Ld. CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Consequently, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

From the records, we also notice that the assessee was proceeded ex parte before the Ld. CIT(A), who subsequently dismissed the appeal on the basis of documents placed on record.

Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering that the assessee could not effectively represent his case before the Ld. CIT(A), the Bench is of the considered view that, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity ought to be given to the assessee to represent his case.

Accordingly, we deem it proper to set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for decision afresh, in accordance with law, after providing an adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the set-aside proceedings.

Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter shall in no way be construed as expressing any opinion on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated independently by the Ld. CIT(A).

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.