EKAM CONSTRUCTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,ASHOK VIHAR, NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI

Shri Mukesh Garg, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee had filed appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 31 days. The assessee had filed an application seeking condonation of delay in filing of appeal. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appeal is time bared and the assessee has not been able to explain ‘sufficient cause’ for delay in filing of appeal. The ld. Counsel

Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department opposed the appeal. The ld. DR submits that the assessee has not been able to explain ‘sufficient cause’ for delay of filing of appeal before the CIT(A). The ld. DR supported the impugned order in dismissing appeal of assessee on the ground of limitation.

Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the CIT(A) has dismissed appeal of the assessee on the ground of limitation. The assessee had filed appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 31 days. The assessee has given reasons for delay in filing of appeal. After perusal of the same, I am satisfied that the delay in filing of appeal was not deliberate on the part of the assessee. The reasons for delay in filing of appeal before the CIT(A) appears to be bonafide.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 has held that liberal approach should be adopted while dealing with an application praying for condonation of delay. Refusing to condone delay can result in meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. Pedantic and hyper technical approach should not be adopted while dealing with an application for condonation of delay.

In the case of Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Nath Sahu & Others vs Gobardhan Sao and Others, 2002 SCC (3) 195/2002 SCR (2) 77 the Hon’ble Courthas held that the expression “sufficient cause” within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act or Order 22 Rule 9 of Civil Procedure Code or any other similar provision should receive

The delay in filing of appeal before the First Appellate Authority is condoned. The appeal is restored back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.