M/S. OBULAPURAM MINING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,BELLARY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

At the outset, Ld.AR submitted that, Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding issues on merits. He submitted that, assessee filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A) with delay of 57 days. He submitted that, Ld.CIT(A) did not condone the delay and rejected the appeal.

Before us, Ld.AR submitted that, reason attributed for delay was found to be vague by Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR submitted that the impugned order is unreasoned, as nothing is specified as to why explanation furnished by assessee is not acceptable.

Before us, Ld.AR submitted that, delay occasioned to file appeal before Ld.CIT(A) was not intentional and deliberate, and that, assessee was precluded from travelling to Bellary, due to condition imposed by Hon’ble Supreme Court, while granting bail. He submitted that, both Directors of assessee were precluded by Hon’ble Supreme Court to travel to Bellary, and therefore appeal could not be filed in time. 5. On the contrary, Ld.CIT.DR submitted that, delay has not been condoned by Ld.CIT(A), as no evidence were filed by assessee in support of its contention. 6. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides, in light of records placed before us. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katji & Ors reported in (1987) 167 ITR 471 held that, when substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because non-deliberate delay. Hon’ble Court has held that, there is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately or on account of culpable negligence or on a malafide, and that litigation does not Page 3 of 5 IT(TP)A No.180/Bang/2020 stand to benefit by resorting to delay, in fact he is on serious risk. 7. In various cases Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Court’s time and again laid down principles that, there should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice oriented and non- pedantic approach while considering the application of condonation of delay. The term “sufficient cause” should be construed liberally and that substantial Justice being paramount and pivotal, technical consideration should not be given undue emphasis. 8. Respectfully following above principles, we condone the delay caused by assessee in filing appeal before Ld.CIT(A). We remand the case back to Ld.CIT(A) to decide the issues alleged by assessee on merits. Ld.CIT(A) is directed to pass a reasoned order after considering the submissions and evidences filed by assessee in respect of its claim. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard shall be granted to assessee in accordance with law. Accordingly grounds raised