Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals were filed by the assessee against orders that dismissed their appeals due to delay without condoning it. The assessee argued that the delay was unintentional and due to circumstances beyond their control, such as office relocation and frequent transfer of officers.
Held
The Tribunal held that the first appellate authority was wrong in presuming deliberate negligence or malafide intention in the delay. Citing the Supreme Court's judgment in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji, the Tribunal emphasized a justice-oriented approach for condoning delays.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority should be condoned.
Sections Cited
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 These are appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders passed by ld Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam all dated 22.9.2025 for the assessment year 2018-19 to 20. 20-21 and 2017-28 and 2022-23, respectively. 2. At the outset, ld AR of the assessee submitted that in these appeals, ld Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam has dismissed the appeals without condoning the delay as time barred. It was the submission that 2 Bhubaneswar Muncipal Corporation, the delay in filing the appeals was neither intentional nor deliberate but due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. 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 Addl/JCIT(A)-2 has dismissed the appeals exparte by not condoning the delay. It was submitted that the delay in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority was due to various reasons beyond the control of the assessee viz; shifting of office from one place to other, frequent transfer of government officers and also due to general election. It was the prayer that the delay in filing the appeals may be condoned and the matter may be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) to readjudicate the appeals on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee.
In reply, ld Sr DR has supported the orders of ld Addl/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 Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam. We observe that there are delays in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority in the respective assessment years as follows: ITA No./Asst. year Days of delay 685/2018-19 312 686/2019-20 311 3 Bhubaneswar Muncipal Corporation, 687/2020-21 310 688/2020-212 310 690/2017-18 313 691/2022-23 310 The ld. Addl/JCIT(A) has referred various judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in rejecting the request for condoning the delay. The assessee has mainly shown the cause that due to shifting of office, frequent transfer of officers in charge of tax matter and also simultaneously the general election, there was delay in filing of appeals. By delaying the appeals, 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 appeals. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority and direct him to decide the issues on merits, after giving effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee within six months 4 Bhubaneswar Muncipal Corporation, from the date of issue of this order. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the first appellate authority without seeking adjournment on flimsy grounds/reasons.
In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 23/12/2025.