What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the delay was inordinate and not supported by sufficient cause or valid proof of treatment. The Tribunal also noted a short payment of the appeal fee.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 171 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to illness, but this was not supported by a medical certificate.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned without sufficient cause and proper supporting evidence.

Anjay Prakash Mohnot vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C/“SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI

Hearing: 09.11.2017

आदेश / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee, aggrieved by the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-4, Chennai dated 08.03.2016 pertaining to assessment year 1983-84.

At the outset, it was noticed that there was a delay of 171 days in filing this appeal by the assessee. Consequent to this, the assessee filed a condonation petition dated 06.05.2017 for condoantion of delay stating that the said delay in filing the appeal is neither willful nor deliberate but due to frequent illness of the assessee, who was advised to take complete bed rest by the Doctor.

Thereafter, the assessee was totally bed ridden and totally immobile to take any of this duty. However, the condonation petition is not supported by Medical Certificate given by Doctor.

In this case, the delay of 171 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal is very inordinate delay, it cannot be condoned on simple reason that the case calls for sympathy or merely out of benevolence to the party seeking relief. In granting the indulgence and condoning the delay, it must be proved beyond the shadow of doubt that the appellant was diligent and was not guilty of negligence, whatsoever. The sufficient cause within the contemplation of the limitation provisions must be a cause which is beyond the control of the party invoking the aid of the provisions. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ramlal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. in AIR 1961 (SC)

361 has held that the cause for the delay in filing the appeal, which by due care and attention, could have been avoided, cannot be a sufficient cause within the meaning of the limitation provision. Where no negligence or inaction, or want of bonafides can be imputed to the appellant, a liberal construction of the provisions has to be made in order to advance substantial justice.

In the present case, the assessee justified the delay only with reference to the Affidavit by the assessee stating that the assessee had fluctuating blood pressure causing immense giddiness. This reason advanced by the assessee is not supported by Doctors’ Certificate. Therefore, I am of the opinion that this kind of delay does not warrant condonation, since the assessee has not shown any valid proof for undergoing treatment on the advice of doctor, and also the assessee has paid the Tribunal’s fee short by `5,850/-. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed as unadmitted.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 21st November, 2017.

ANJAY PRAKASH MOHNOT,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments