TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 779X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not been considered by CIT(A) in all its aspects. The assessee has detailed out various reasons in the affidavit dated 01.08.2003 explaining the delay in filing of the appeal before CIT(A), Salem. 3. The brief facts of the issue are that there was a delay in filing of the appeal before the CIT(A). The total delay is 55 delays. The assessee submitted before the CIT(A) that assessee received the assessment order on 25.04.2003 and handed over the papers to his Chartered Accountant. Thereafter the assessee's son was sick and for that purpose he went to various places and returned only on 14th August 2003 and filed the appeal on 18th August 2003. To this effect the assessee filed an affidavit before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) not sati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vest right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact, he runs a serious risk. It must be grasped that the judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice or technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so. 5. Further it was also held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that liberal approach is to be adopted while condoning the delay on the following r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bstantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. 5. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact, he runs a serious risk. 6. It must be grasped that the judiciary is respect not on account of its power to legalise injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vedabai @ Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil and others, 253 ITR 798 has held as follows:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
