DR. VIVEK G. BHARTU,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 8(3)(3), MUMBAI

At the outset assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has not condoned the delay ranging from 96 days to 108 days in filing the appeal and has hence dismissed the appeal without considering the merits.

I find that assessee has submitted before the learned CIT-A

Later on after proper advice the assessee filed the appeals which resulted in a delay of approximately 3 months. Learned CIT-A had not condoned the delay considering that the reason attributed for the delay are too general.

Upon hearing the learned departmental representative and perusing the records I find that as expounded by the honourable apex court a distinction has to be made between a small delay and inordinate delay. Consideration of substantial interest of justice has also to be taken into account. Considering the present case on the prism of aforesaid expositions in my considered opinion the small delay in filing appeals before the learned CIT-A deserved to be condoned, on the facts and circumstances explained for the delay. Accordingly in the interest of justice I condone the delay and remit the issue raised on merits of the file of learned CIT-A. Learned CIT-A shall consider the issues raised on merits and pass speaking order after giving the assessee proper opportunity of being heard.

In the result these appeals by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.