Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was filed with a significant delay of 2027 days. The delay was attributed to the demise of the assessee's previous Chartered Accountant and subsequent administrative issues.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, emphasizing that technicalities should not override substantial justice, especially when a significant Supreme Court decision on the core issue was pending. The appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and the core issue of assessee's status as 'Old Settler of Sikkim' should be adjudicated in light of Supreme Court directions.
Sections Cited
144, 147, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
order
: December 10, 2025 ORDER
Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 05.11.2019 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
At the outset, the ld. A.R. submitted that the appeal of the assessee is delayed by 2027 days and the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay, which reads as under:
Binod Kumar Agarwal “BEFORE THE NOTARY PUBLIC AFFIDAVIT 1, Binod Kumar Agarwal, son of Late Khachanchi Ram Agarwal, aged 50 years, by religion Hindu, residing at Singtam Bazar, Singtam-737134, Sikkim, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows-
1. 1. That an appeal relating to A.Y. 2013-14 was filed before the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC on 04.01.2019 against order dated 28.11.2018 u/s 144/147.
2. That the said appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) by passing an order on 05.11.2019.
3. That I contacted Late V.N. Purohit, FCA having his office at chambers,4, Chowringhee Lane, Kolkata-700016 through my CA, Yash Arya who had represented me before the lower authorities on or around 04.12.2019. The said CA Yash Arya delivered the relevant documents to him for filing appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT.
4. That I was of the bonafide belief that my appeal has been duly filed before the Hon'ble ITAT and the notice of hearing shall be received in due time.
5. That after a considerable period of time, when no notice of hearing was forthcoming of requested Mr Yash Arya, FCA on or around 15.06.2025 to enquire into the reasons for unreasonable delay in receipt of notice of hearing.
6. That after due enquiry, it transpired that no appeal was filed in ITAT and unfortunately CA V.N. Purohit had expired in the month of May,2021 7. That then I contacted Advocate Siddharth Agarwal of 1, Gibson Lane, Kolkata 700069 on or around 16.07.2025 through CA Yash Arya for filing appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal and sent him all the relevant documents.
8. That the office of the said counsel prepared the appeal and finally filed the same on 19.08.2025 with a delay of around 2027 days.
9. That the facts stated in para 1 to 8 are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.”
The ld. A.R. further submitted that the issue in appeals is with regard to whether the assessee is an Old Settler of Sikkim. It was also submitted that in view of the Writ Petition filed by the assessee as a Member of the Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim in Writ Petition No.59 of 2013 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has given directions in its order dated 11.02.2013 and the Act has also been amended with retrospective effect from 1990-91. The ld. AR Binod Kumar Agarwal also submitted that the assessment order has been passed in November, 2018 and the order of the ld. CIT(A) is of 2019 and it is after the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has come. The ld. AR prayed that the delay may be condoned and the issue be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re- adjudication after considering the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the Old Settlers of Sikkim.
Contrary to that, the ld. DR opposed the condonation of delay and submitted that the order of the ld. CIT(A) being 2019, the substantial delay should not be condoned.
Upon hearing the rival contentions and going over the facts of the case, it appears to us that that the issue in the present appeal is with regard to whether the assessee is an Old Settlers of Sikkim and the Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided the issue in 11.02.2013. This being so, perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee shows that the delay was on account of the demise of the then Chartered Accountant of the assessee. When technicality is fitted against substantial justice, obviously technicality should step back and the delay is only a technical issue and substantial justice should be rejected if the issue of the Old Settlers of Sikkim in respect of the assessee is decided by applying the ratios laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. This being so and also on account of the fact that the affidavit filed by the assessee has not been done to be false. We condone the delay in filing of the appeal as the issue is to be now adjudicated by considering the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Old Settlers of Sikkim. The issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for re- adjudication after considering the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Old Settlers of Sikkim.
Binod Kumar Agarwal 6. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 10th December, 2025.