ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

Ld AR submitted that the assessee is a co-operative society engaged in promotion of handicrafts and handloom of Odisha working under the administrative control of Handlooms, Textiles and handicrafts Department of Govt. of Odisha to provide marketing support to primary handicrafts co- operative societies since 1959. Ld AR submitted that the ld CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing of appeals before him and dismissed the appeals in limine. He submitted that the assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay before the ld.CIT(A) in all the appeals. Such delay has not been condoned by the ld.CIT(A), and all the appeals were dismissed being time barred. Ld AR submitted that the assesse being a government of orisssa undertaking, due to staff shortage, there were delays in filing the appeal. He submitted that the delay in filing of appeals before ld CIT(A) was beyond the control of the assessee and such delay should be condoned and the appeals may be restored to the file of the ld AO for fresh consideration.

In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that the ld CIT(A) has considered various judicial pronouncements on the issue of delay condonation in the respective appeals and has dismissed the appeals in limine. Ld CIT DR also submitted that the assessee has not shown sufficient cause in support of the delay in filing the appeals, therefore, no interference in the orders of the ld CIT(A) is required.

We have considered the rival submissions. It is observed that the common issue involved in all the appeals is, whether the delay in filing the appeals before the ld.CIT(A) deserves to be condoned and whether they are required to be remitted back for adjudication on merit. We observe that there 4 आयकर अपील सं/ITA Nos.496 to500 and 502 to 504/CTK/2025 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2022-23) were delays in the respective assessment years in filing the appeals before the ld CIT(A) as follows:

In the condonation petitions filed before the ld CIT(A) it is commonly stated that due to online service of notice, consequential orders and non- verification of income tax portal on regular basis coupled with negligence or inaction of the authorized representatives of the assessee in the covid-19 pandemic, the appeals could not be filed in due time, for which, there were delay in filing the appeals before the ld CIT(A). At the time of hearing, ld AR submitted that due to staff shortage, the verification of income tax portal was made. It was also submitted that the delay is attributable to online compliance of faceless regime.

With the assistance of ld AR and ld Sr DR, we have gone through the reasons stated in the condonation petitions filed before the ld CIT(A). Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, provides powers to the ld Commissioner of Income Appeals to condone the delay in filing the appeal before him. It has been used in Section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963 that whenever interpretation and construction before the Hon’ble High Court as well as before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, then the Hon’ble Courts were unanimous in their 5 आयकर अपील सं/ITA Nos.496 to500 and 502 to 504/CTK/2025 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2022-23) conclusion that the expression is to be used liberally. Reference is made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji & Othrs, (1987) 167 ITR 41 (SC), wherein, it has been held as under: “1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late.

Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner.

When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a nondeliberate delay.

There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact he runs a serious risk.

It must be grasped that judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so.”

It is sufficed to say that the Hon’ble Courts are unanimous in their approach to propound that whenever the reasons assigned by an applicant for explaining the delay, then such reasons are to be construed with a justice- oriented approach. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact, the assessee runs a serious risk. In the instant case, the delay was attributable specifically due to faceless regime as the notices were sent through 6 आयकर अपील सं/ITA Nos.496 to500 and 502 to 504/CTK/2025 (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2022-23) online only. Due to some reasons or other, the notice of hearing was not in the knowledge of the assessee, as stated in the condonation petition.

In the light of above discussion, we are of the considered view that the assessee in its averments has made out a clear case that there was sufficient cause being its control prevented from filing the appeals before the ld CIT(A) in time. The assessee is diligent in its responsibility as the appeals have been filed before the Tribunal against the orders of the ld CIT(A). We, accordingly, condone the delay in filing the appeals before the ld CIT(A) in all these assessment years under consideration and set aside the issues to the file of the ld CIT(A) as he has not applied his mind on facts on the merit of the issues. Therefore, we remit the issues to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merit after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee will be liberty to raise any plea on merit for all the appeals.

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes.