Misplacement of record by assistant constitute sufficient reason for condonation of delay – ITAT

Misplacement of record by assistant constitute sufficient reason for condonation of delay – ITAT

In a recent judgment, the ITAT has held that misplacement of record by assistant constituted sufficient reason for condonation of delay.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 3838 (2024) (01) ITAT

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) refusing to condone the delay of 111 days occurred in preferring the appeal.

Before the Tribunal the assessee submitted that the Assistant had misplaced papers and that was the reason why, the delay had occurred. It was also submitted that there were no mala fides in the delay and the reason submitted by the assessee was true and genuine.

It was further submitted that on two occasions adjournments were sought and granted, but subsequently the dates of hearing were not known to the assessee resulted in his not appearing before the learned CIT(A).

It was submitted that because the learned CIT(A) refused to condone the delay and the order was an ex-parte one and the assessee could not present his case effectively, and no proper enquiry was caused.

It was prayed that if given an opportunity, assessee is ready to submit all the material before the learned CIT(A) and to co-operate with the appellate proceedings.

On the contrary, the Revenue submitted that plea of misplacement of record by the assistant does not constitute sufficient reason to condone the delay, and also the reasons for non-appearance of the assessee before the CIT(A) were not properly explained. It was contended that the law does not help the persons, who sleep over the matters.

The Tribunal observed that it was a fact that the assessee pleaded before the CIT(A) that the delay occurred due to misplacement of record by the Assistant and also that the assessee was represented before the learned CIT(A) on two occasions. It was not the case of the Revenue that the assessee had any intentions in preferring the appeal with delay. There was no reason not to believe the explanation submitted by the assessee for the delay.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal opined that giving an opportunity to the assessee will be in the interest of justice.

Therefore, the ITAT set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for taking a view according to law on merits, after hearing the assessee.

In the result, appeal of assessee was treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• ITAT allows exemption of Rs. 25 lakhs u/s 10(10A) to non-government employees
• PCIT has revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 over the cases passed by the NFAC or the JAO
• Appellate court interfering with MACT finding must undertake reappreciation of evidence
• When delay is not huge & involves huge monetary liability, lenient approach to be taken
• EoGM of company can not ratify diversion of fund raised by preferential issue – SC