VIDYA SHANKAR JAISWAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Facts

The assessee, Vidya Shankar Jaiswal, filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against an order of the Assessing Officer dated 16.12.2018. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal on 3.8.2023. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the CIT(A)'s order. The ITAT, by its order dated 13.2.2024, dismissed the assessee's appeal on the ground of a 39-day delay in filing. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the ITAT's order. The ITAT's order also dealt with a connected appeal (ITA No. 351/RPR/2023) which had a delay of 166 days.

Held

The High Court held that there was an admitted delay of 39 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT. The assessee's reason for the delay was that the appeal migrated to the National Faceless Appeal Centre, and the assessee lacked knowledge of notices and the CIT(A)'s order. The Court noted that the Supreme Court, in a related matter concerning the same assessee (Vidya Shankar Jaiswal), had set aside the High Court's order rejecting an appeal on delay grounds and adopted a justice-oriented and liberal approach by condoning a delay of 166 days. Considering the assessee's reasons for delay, the fact that the revenue did not file a counter-affidavit controverting these reasons, and the Supreme Court's precedent, the High Court condoned the 39-day delay. The substantial question of law was answered accordingly. The matter was remitted back to the ITAT for deciding the appeal on merits. The appeal was allowed to the extent indicated.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in rejecting the application for condonation of delay of 39 days in filing the appeal, by recording a finding which is perverse to the record? (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the impugned order of the ITAT should be set aside and the delay condoned. This is because a connected appeal (ITA No. 351/RPR/2023) with a delay of 166 days was challenged before the Supreme Court, which set aside the High Court's order rejecting the appeal on delay grounds and condoned the delay. The assessee also relied on a recent order of the High Court in a similar matter (Tax Case No. 166 of 2024). The reason for the delay was attributed to the appeal migrating to the National Faceless Appeal Centre, leading to a lack of knowledge of notices and the CIT(A)'s order. Revenue's contention: The Revenue supported the impugned order of the ITAT and prayed for the dismissal of the appeal.