SRI DEVRAJ URS VIDYA SAMSTHE ,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHITRADURGA
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEYAssessment Year: 2017-18
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi vide order dated 28/02/2025 in DIN No.
ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073810989(1) for the assessment year
2017-18. 2. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned CIT(A). The main issue is whether the delay of 686 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) deserves to be condoned.
Page 2 of 4
.
3. The assessment order was passed on 26 December 2019. The appeal before the learned CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 686 days. The assessee explained that the delay was caused due to the Covid-19
pandemic, which began from March 2020. The assessee relied on the Suo Motu judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court extending the limitation period during Covid. However, the learned CIT(A) was not satisfied with the explanation. He dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay.
Being aggrieved by the order of learned CIT-A, the assessee is in appeal before us.
The learned AR submitted that if the period excluded by the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 is taken into account, the effective delay is only 86 days. It was prayed that the delay should be condoned in the interest of justice. The ld. AR also submitted that the assessee had a good case on merits and therefore deserved to be heard.
The learned DR opposed the condonation. He submitted that the time limit for filing the appeal had already expired before the commencement of the Covid-19 period. Therefore, the assessee cannot claim the benefit of exclusion of limitation period. Without prejudice, the learned DR submitted that if the delay is condoned, it should be subject to the imposition of costs on the assessee for his negligent conduct.
We have considered the rival submissions. We note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020, Page 3 of 4
.
by order dated 23 March 2020 and subsequent extensions, directed exclusion of the period from 15 March 2020 to 28 February 2022 for the purpose of limitation.
1 If this period is excluded, the effective delay in filing the appeal is about 86 days. We are of the considered view that such delay is not deliberate. The assessee has explained that the delay occurred due to circumstances beyond his control.
2 The principle of law is well settled that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice should be preferred. The right of appeal is a statutory right and should not be denied merely on account of technicalities. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we condone the delay. We also note that no mala fide intention has been shown against the assessee. Hence, we do not find it a fit case for imposing any cost. Accordingly, the order of the learned CIT(A) dismissing the appeal in limine is set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits, in accordance with law, after providing due opportunity of being heard. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 10th day of September, 2025 (KESHAV DUBEY) Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 10th September, 2025 Page 4 of 4
.
/ vms /
Copy to:
The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file
By order
Asst.