PALM COURT M PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO 41(3)(3) , MUMBAI

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate order, both dated 25.04.2025 passed by the Ld. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – 1, Visakhapatnam [hereinafter shall be referred as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment years 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively.

reshold, the learned counsel fo learned Commissioner of Incom to as "Ld. CIT(A)"] declined to ad rs 2018-19 and 2020-21, on iling the same. In the case of A T(A) recorded a delay of 2075 d sessment Year 2020-21, the d
CIT(A), while declining to con equest made by the assessee fo
, the request pertaining to A er:
EQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF DELA
MATTER OF PALM COURT "M" PREMIS
ATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE APPELL
Α.Υ. 2018-19
t is Co-operative Housing Society. For the 9, an order under Section 143(1) of the was passed on 31.05.2019, denying th n 80P(2) (d) claimed by the appellant. The eal was 30.06.2019. However, the appe ow on 04.03.2025, with a delay of 2074 d ng the said order, the appellant, as adv application under Section 154 of the Inco ver, this application was rejected by right in the midst of the nationwid posed by the Government of India from y, the manager responsible for overseeing ating with the tax consultant inadverten
Managing Committee about the rejec application. Additionally, after contractin has been dealing with post-COVID health
M Premises Co-operative
Society Ltd
2
830 & 3831/MUM/2025
or the assessee me-tax (Appeals) dmit the appeals the ground of Assessment Year ays in filing the delay noted was done the delay, for condonation.
A.Y. 2018–19 is AY
SES CO-
LANT) e Assessment
Income Tax he deduction e deadline for ellant is filing days vised, filed a ome Tax Act, the CPC on e COVID-19
24.03.2020. g tax matters ntly failed to ction of the ng COVID-19, h issues.

The delay in nationwide C
COVID health regularly and genuine belief the manager
Consultant h had not been manager pro swiftly engag matters, expl necessary app
The delay o circumstances intentional no appellant has cause has be delay, and th be considere substantial ju
In light of the filing the appe
The affidavit attached, whi condonation o
For your kind following 2 c condonation
2.1 The Ld. CIT(A), delay primarily on th absence of negligence of diligence in pur observed that no cog the reasons advanced
Ld. CIT(A)’s findings r
Palm Court M
ITA Nos. 38

n filing the appeal was primarily cau
COVID-19 lockdown, followed by the man h issues, which affected his ability to atte d oversee the society's affairs effective f that tax matters were being handled ap only became aware in November 2024
had also been facing health-related cha n managing the tax matters. Upon realiz omptly informed the Managing Comm ged new tax consultant to review all lore possible remedial actions, and ens peals were filed without further delay.
of 2,074 days in filing the appeal w s beyond the appellant's control. It or motivated by any malafide intent. Furt s not derived any benefit from the dela een demonstrated to justify the condon he appellant respectfully requests that the ed with a justice-oriented approach, ustice.
e above, it is respectfully requested that eal be condoned.
t of the Manager detailing the afores ich may kindly be placed before the Hon'b of the delay in submission of appeal.
d referral the assessee wishes to place re case laws that lays down the law on of delay:”
however, rejected the plea for he ground that the assessee fai e and failed to demonstrate a s suing the appellate remedy.
gent evidence had been furnishe d in the application. The relevan reads as under:
M Premises Co-operative
Society Ltd
3
830 & 3831/MUM/2025
used by the nager's post- end the office ely. Under a appropriately, that the Tax allenges and zing this, the mittee, which pending tax sure that the was due to was neither thermore, the ay. Sufficient nation of the e application
, to render the delay in aid facts is ble CIT(A) for liance on the the issue of condonation of iled to establish satisfactory level
It was further ed in support of nt portion of the “The appellan filing the app by the Hono
Application N
1360 days in is carefully inordinate de appellant not appeal along
3. Before us, the le the assessee is now substantiate the reas application. It was p account of prolonged who was primarily e health issues faced b passed away.
4. Having regard to are of the conside opportunity to place condonation request therefore, set aside th the matter to his file the application for c opportunity of being may be placed on re condoned, the Ld. CI
Palm Court M
ITA Nos. 38

nt has not furnished any proper reason peal along with proofs. Even after exclus ourable Supreme court of India in M
No. 21 of 2022 dt. 10.01.2022 there is a n filing the appeal. The condonation delay gone through. The request for con elay in filing of appeal is not accept t furnished any proper cause for delay with evidences.”
earned counsel for the assessee w willing to produce necessa sons for the delay as stated in t pointed out that the delay was d post-COVID illness of the soc entrusted with tax matters, as by the erstwhile tax consultant, o the facts and circumstances ered view that the assessee e on record the evidence in t. In the interest of substant he impugned order of the Ld. CI e for the limited purpose of con condonation of delay, after gra heard and after appreciating th cord by the assessee. In the ev
IT(A) shall thereafter proceed to M Premises Co-operative
Society Ltd
4
830 & 3831/MUM/2025
for delay in sion provided
Miscellaneous delay about y application ndonation of table as the in filing the e submitted that ary evidence to the condonation s occasioned on ciety’s manager, well as serious who eventually of the case, we e deserves an support of the tial justice, we,
IT(A) and restore nsidering afresh anting adequate he evidence that vent the delay is o adjudicate the appeal on merits i reasonable opportuni
4.1 The facts pertain materia and identica appeal for Assessme the Ld. CIT(A) to be d with the observations
5. In the result, bo statistical purposes.
Order pronoun (RAHUL CHA
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 31/07/2025
Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.

Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.

////

Palm Court M
ITA Nos. 38

n accordance with law and ity to the assessee.
ning to Assessment Year 2020
al to those of Assessment Yea nt Year 2020-21 is also restor decided afresh, mutatis mutandis s made hereinabove.
oth the appeals of the assessee ced in the open Court on 31/0
d/-
S
AUDHARY)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :

BY ORDER

(Assistant Re

ITAT, Mu

M Premises Co-operative
Society Ltd
5
830 & 3831/MUM/2025
after affording
0-21 being pari- ar 2018-19, the ed to the file of s, in accordance e are allowed for 07/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
R, gistrar) umbai