Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA
ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Somanath Sahoo, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 17/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 17/11/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 18.04.2022 passed in DIN & Order No.:ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1042758677(1) for the assessment year 2014-2015.
It was submitted by the ld. AR of the assessee that the assessee had filed appeal against the rectification order passed by the AO u/s.154 of the Act, dated 04.07.2017, insofar as the credit for prepaid taxes has not been granted to the assessee as per the 26AS statement in the case of the assessee. It was submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay of 1006 days. It was the submission that the delay was on account of ignorance of law and wrong advice given by the counsel. It was the submission that in any case the issue was only to give prepaid taxes and the evidence was also before AO. It was the submission that the delay in filing of the appeal may be condoned before the ld.CIT(A). It was the prayer that the issue may be restored to the file of AO for verification of allowing the credit of the prepaid taxes.
In reply, ld. Sr.DR submitted that 26AS statement, which has been produced before the Tribunal, is a fresh evidence, which should not be considered. It was, therefore, submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is not liable to be condoned and ignorance of law is not a ground for condonation of delay.
We have considered the rival submissions. It is also well-known fact that if the technicality is pitted against substantial justice, the technicality must step back and substantial justice should prevail, we feel that the delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee is liable to be condoned.
Coming to the powers of the ITAT in respect of condonation of delay, a perusal of the provisions of Section 253(5) of the Act, there is a specific provision that the Tribunal can admit an appeal or permit the filing of a memorandum of cross-objections after the expiry of the relevant period referred to in sub-section (3) or sub-section (4), if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. As mentioned earlier, we are of the view that the assessee was prevented by substantial cause in not filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) stands condoned.