← All Phrases

“reasonable cause”

PenaltySection 273BSection 273B7,285 judgments

The decision most relied on for reasonable cause is Ashok Pai v. CIT (292 ITR 11), cited in 812 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reasonable cause

Ashok Pai v. CIT
292 ITR 11 · 2007 · Supreme Court
812
citing judgments

“Concealment of particulars of income” and “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” are two distinct offences under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. A penalty cannot be levied under one limb if the show cause notice or basis for penalty specifies the other, as this constitutes a complete variance in the reasons for assuming jurisdiction.

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.
2 SCC 107 · 1987 · Supreme Court
451
citing judgments

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy
7 SCC 123 · 1998 · Supreme Court
368
citing judgments

The Supreme Court outlines the principles for condoning delay in filing appeals, stating that a litigant's lapse is not always a bar if the explanation is bona fide and not a dilatory strategy. Courts should show utmost consideration to suitors and prioritize substantial justice unless the delay is deliberately to gain time.

Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT
115 TTJ 419 · 2008 · ITAT
292
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with a notice issued under Section 142(1) is not leviable when the assessee demonstrates a reasonable cause for such non-compliance. The decision defines what constitutes 'reasonable cause' in this context.

Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT
280 ITR 357 · 2006 · High Court
182
citing judgments

The expression "sufficient cause" for condoning delay in filing appeals must receive a liberal and purposive construction. This approach aims to advance substantial justice, which is of paramount importance.

CIT v. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadai and Ors.
153 ITR 596 · 1985 · High Court
171
citing judgments

Where a reasonable cause for delay in filing an appeal exists, the period of delay may not be a relevant factor for condonation. The court has condoned even substantial delays, such as nearly 21 years, based on the presence of a reasonable cause.

People Education and Economic Development Society (PEEDS) v. ITO
100 ITD 87 · 2006 · ITAT
121
citing judgments

When substantial justice and procedural technicalities are in conflict, especially in cases involving non-deliberate delay, the cause of substantial justice must be prioritized. The opposing party cannot claim a vested right to benefit from injustice due to such delays.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd.
262 ITR 260 · 2003 · High Court
121
citing judgments

Journal entries for accepting or repaying loans and deposits, without any actual cash transaction, do not violate the provisions of Section 269SS or Section 269T of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, such transactions do not attract penalties under Section 271D or Section 271E.

Judgments citing reasonable cause

C Ramasamy Gounder HUF, Erode vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Tirupur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1305/CHNY/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Mr.Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1305/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 C. Ramasamy Gounder Huf, Income Tax Officer 3/112, Puduvelliyampalayam, V. Ward 1(5), Nathakkadaiyur Kangayam, Tirupur. Erode – 638 701. [Pan: Aachc-1186-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Arjunraj, Ca For अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Manjunatha. G:

For Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148

1305/Chny/2023 Officer and as well as the ld. CIT(A) was not noticed by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee submitted that there is a reasonable cause for not filing appeal within due date under the Act and thus, prayed for condonation of delay. The ld. CIT(A) after considering relevant ... advance substantial justice. Since, the appellant has explained reasons for not filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and said reasons does come under reasonable cause, we direct the first appellate authority to condone the delay in filing of appeal and admit the appeal for hearing and decide the issues

Venkatesan Ramaiah, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corporte Ward10(5), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1294/CHNY/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Mr.Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1294/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Venkatesan Ramaiah, Income Tax Officer #1, Rajammal Street, V. Non Corporate Ward -10(5), 6Th Floor, Wanaparthy Block, Shenoy Nagar, Chennai – 600 030 . Aayakar Bhavan, 121, M.G. [Pan: Aabpv-0386-M] Road, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Anand Babunath, Ca : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Anand Babunath, CA
Section 54B

petition filed by the assessee submitted that the reasons given by the appellant for delay in filing of appeal does not come under the reasonable cause as provided under the Act for condonation of :-3-: ITA. No: 1294/Chny/2023 delay and thus, delay in filing of appeal should not be condoned ... find that the reasons given by the appellant for not filing the appeal within due date prescribed under the Act, does come under reasonable cause for condonation of delay and thus, we condone the delay in filing of appeal and admit the appeal filed by the appellant. 5. The brief