JAYSUKHBHAI GOBARBHAI SAVALIA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(3)(1), SURAT

At the very outset, we noticed that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) by not condoning the delay in filing the same. Ld. AR reiterated the same arguments as were raised by him before Ld. CIT(A) and has submitted that delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) was on account of Jaysukhbhai Gobarbhai Savalia, Surat. the fact that assessee was not aware of the assessment order passed for the year under consideration and order of assessment was never served physically upon the assessee.

Wherein on the contrary Ld. DR contested the plea of the assessee by submitting that assessee was aware about the passing of order by AO and there was no sufficient cause with the assessee for not filing the appeal within time.

After considering the entire factual position as explained before us and also keeping in view, the principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., [1987] AIR 1353 (SC),wherein it has been held that where substantial justice is pitted against technicalities of non- deliberate delay, then in that eventuality substantial justice is to be preferred. In our view the principals of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Hence considering the explanation put forth by the Assessee by justifiably and properly explaining the delay which occurred in filing the appeal and construing the expression "sufficient cause" liberally we are inclined to condone the delay of 75 days in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A).