RAYMOND VISHAL,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-1(2)(3), BANGALORE

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi vide order dated 07/12/2023 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/ S/250/2023-24/1058546145(1) for the assessment year 2017-18.

Thus, there was procedural irregularity, depriving the assessee of opportunity to present his case, which amounts to violation of natural justice. In support, the assessee filed annexures including (a) death certificate of his father, (b) correct email ID copy as per Form 35, and (c) screenshots of the notices showing wrong email service.

In view of the above, the assessee submitted that there was no deliberate inaction or mala fide intention in filing appeal late. The delay was due to sufficient and reasonable cause. Refusal to condone will cause irreparable loss and injustice, while no prejudice will be caused to the Revenue. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471, wherein it was held that ordinarily a litigant does not benefit by lodging an appeal late, and refusing condonation may result in dismissal of a meritorious matter at the threshold. In view of the above, the ld. AR prayed to condone the delay and set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT-A. The ld. AR also undertook the responsibility for making the necessary compliance on behalf of the assessee before the ld. CIT-A.

On the other hand, the ld. DR vehemently opposed to condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee.

We have considered the rival submissions and the materials placed on record. The reasons explained by the assessee show that the delay was due to factors beyond his control. The improper service of . notices, disruption during COVID period, and death of the assessee’s father constitute sufficient cause within the meaning of law.

It is settled principle that in matters of condonation of delay, a liberal approach has to be adopted, particularly where substantial justice is at stake. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (supra) has laid down that technical considerations should not override the cause of justice and ordinarily, litigants do not stand to gain by delaying appeals. We also note that the assessee acted promptly once became aware of fact about the order having passed by the ld. CIT-A dated 25.03.2025 and filed appeal within 10 days. Considering the facts, evidences, and settled judicial principles, we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 422 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. As the order of the ld. CIT- A is ex-parte, we are inclined to set aside the same to him for fresh adjudication as per law. It is needless to mentioned that the assessee shall co-operative during the proceedings and avoid unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.