DIPIKA AQUA FARM,OLPAD vs. ADDL JCIT (A)-11, MUMBAI

Facts

The assessee, engaged in prawns harvesting and trading, filed an appeal with the CIT(A) after a delay of 3018 days. The delay was attributed to not being aware of the demand, as no regular assessment was conducted and knowledge of the demand only came when refunds from subsequent years were adjusted. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to the inordinate delay.

Held

The Tribunal held that the assessee's reason for the delay, which was not checking emails regularly and thus being unaware of the demand, did not constitute a sufficient cause for condonation. The conduct of the assessee was deemed to be grossly negligent. Therefore, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order.

Key Issues

Whether the delay of 3018 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) can be condoned due to the assessee's alleged lack of awareness of the demand, or if the delay amounts to gross negligence.