SAVE A FAMILY PLAN (INDIA) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court set aside the impugned order of the ITAT dated 03.07.2023. The Court directed the appellant to file an additional affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT within two weeks from the date of the order. Upon receipt of this affidavit, the ITAT was directed to consider the appellant's application for condonation of delay within a further period of three weeks, after hearing the appellant. The Court explicitly stated that the Income Tax Appeal was disposed of without answering the questions of law raised. The principle derived is that procedural technicalities, especially concerning delay condonation, should not automatically lead to dismissal without exploring avenues for rectification, provided no prejudice is caused to the other party.
What were the facts?
The appellant, Save A Family Plan (India), filed an Income Tax Appeal before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order dated 03.07.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench. The ITAT had dismissed the appellant's appeal for assessment year 2014-2015. The dismissal was based on the ITAT's finding that the affidavit filed by the appellant to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal lacked cogent reasons. The ITAT had directed the appellant to file a better affidavit, but this was not done, leading to the dismissal of the delay condonation application and subsequently the appeal. The appellant argued that the fresh affidavit was ready but could not be uploaded due to difficulties with video conference proceedings.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the ITAT was justified in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of an inadequate affidavit supporting the delay condonation application, without considering the merits of the case? (Question of law) The appellant contended that the fresh affidavit was prepared and ready for filing, but technical difficulties with video conferencing prevented its timely submission to the ITAT. They argued that no prejudice would be caused to the revenue if the delay condonation application was reconsidered. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the adequacy of the affidavit or the ITAT's decision.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Dr. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. This Income Tax Appeal impugns an order dated 03.07.2023 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, Cochin, in ITA No.138/COCH/2020, pertaining to the assessment year 2014-2015 under the Income Tax Act.
Shorn of unnecessary factual details, the brief facts necessary for the disposal of this Income Tax Appeal are that the Tribunal, by the impugned order, had dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant assessee solely for the reason that the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application seeking to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal did not contain any cogent reasons for the delay occasioned. The Tribunal was of the view that a better affidavit to support the delay condonation application was necessary and, towards that end, had directed the appellant to file a better affidavit in support of the delay condonation application. Apparently, notwithstanding the time granted to the appellant, the said affidavit was not filed, and consequently, the Tribunal proceeded to dismiss the delay condonation application and, thereafter, the appeal itself.
:3:
Before us, it is the submission of the learned Senior counsel Sri.V.Abraham Markose, appearing on behalf of the appellant, that the fresh affidavit as sought by the Tribunal was, in fact, ready to be filed before the Tribunal on the date when the appeal was posted. However, inasmuch as the hearing was through video conference and was a difficulty expressed by the appellant for uploading the fresh affidavit, the affidavit did not reach the Tribunal on the said date. It is stated that the fresh affidavit is ready and can be filed before the Tribunal immediately.
Taking note of the said submission of the learned Senior counsel and finding that there would be no prejudice caused to the respondent if there is a fresh consideration of the delay condonation application by the Tribunal, we deem it appropriate to dispose this Income Tax Appeal with the following directions: i. The appellant shall file the additional affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay occasioned in filing the appeal before the Tribunal within two weeks from today. ii. On receipt of the said affidavit, the Tribunal shall consider the application preferred by the appellant for :4:
condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal within a further period of three weeks after hearing the appellant. iii. To enable the Tribunal to do so, we set aside the impugned order dated 03.07.2023 of the Tribunal. The Income Tax Appeal is disposed as above without answering the questions of law raised.
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE mns
:5:
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
