Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, OMC Employees Gratuity Fund Trust, filed an appeal against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad, which dismissed their appeal due to delay. The delay was attributed to a change in management, making the new committee unaware of tax matters and notices.
Held
The Tribunal held that the first appellate authority was wrong in presuming deliberate negligence. Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji, the Tribunal emphasized a liberal, justice-oriented approach for condoning delays. Technicalities should not defeat substantial justice, especially when the delay is not deliberate.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned on the grounds of change in management and lack of awareness of tax matters.
Sections Cited
IT Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ) & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
आदेश / O R D E R Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice President (KZ) The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 22.9.2025 passed by ld Addl/JCIT(A)2, Ahmedabad in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10304547 for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. At the outset, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad has dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay citing as time barred. It was the submission that the delay in filing the appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. It was the submission that the delay is attributable to the fact that the assessee was completely unaware about the assessment order, therefore, the appeal could not be 2 आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.645/CT K/2025 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2018-19) filed on time. It was the submission that the appellant is an Employees Gratuity Trust managed by the employees of the company on a rotational basis. The Committee Members of the Trust are not well versed in the tax matters. However, when the new management comes into the control of the Trust, it may take some time to create new id and password for the new committee. As the income tax notices were not in the knowledge of the new persons taking charge of the Fund, there was delay in filing the appeal before the first appellate authority. It was the submission that the law is well settled that the object of the procedural rules is to advance the cause of justice and not to thwarty it and where substantial justice is at stake, technicalities must give way to ensure that the litigant is afforded sufficient opportunity to defend the case. He submitted that without giving any opportunity to the assessee, the ld JCIT(A) has dismissed the appeal exparte by not condoning the delay. It was the prayer that the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and the matter may be restored to the file of the ld JCIT(A) to readjudicate the appeal on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee.
In reply, ld CIT DR has supported the orders of ld JCIT(A) and further contended that the assessee has not shown the sufficient cause for not filing the appeals within time.
We have considered the rival submissions and perused the orders of ld JCIT(A). We observe that there is delay of 37 months in filing the appeal before the first appellate authority. The ld. JCIT(A) has referred various judgments of Tribunal, High Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court in 3 आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.645/CT K/2025 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2018-19) rejecting the request for condoning the delay. The assessee has mainly shown the cause that due to transfer of management and the persons involved in the management were not fully aware about the income tax notices and consequence action. By delaying the appeal, the assessee would not get any advantage rather will suffer financial loss. The Supreme Court, especially in cases like Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987), (167 ITR 471) mandates a liberal, justice-oriented approach for condoning delays, emphasizing that technicalities shouldn't defeat substantial justice, particularly when the delay isn't deliberate and prevents meritorious cases from being heard. The core idea is to prefer substance over form, allowing courts to consider the merits of the case rather than just the delay, especially since the party seeking delay condonation doesn't gain from the delay itself. This judgement has become a foundational judgement in condoning the delay than the other judgements delivered on the issue. In view of this discussion. we are of the view that the first appellate authority was wrong in presuming deliberate negligence or malafide intention in the delay in filing the appeal. Hence, we direct the assessee to file proper condonation petition explaining the reasons for delaying the appeal before the first appellate authority and upon receipt of the petition, the ld JCIT(A) is directed to decide the condonation petition and issues on merits, after giving effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the first appellate authority without seeking adjournment on flimsy grounds/reasons.
4 आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.645/CT K/2025 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2018-19) 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 23/12/2025.