TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peared before the ld. CIT(A) despite various opportunities and finally all these appeals of the assessee were dismissed ex parte and in limini for want of representation as well as e-filing of the appeals. Thus, the reasons explained by the assessee by giving the details are found to be factually correct to the extent of the authorized representative of the assessee and non-appearance of him before the ld. CIT(A) despite six opportunities were given by the ld. CIT(A). The authorized representative keep on filing the adjournment letters but never attended the proceedings. Therefore, we find that there is nothing on record to indicate that the assessee has acted in malafide or attempted to take any advantage by filing these appeals belated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay in all these appeals which has been supported by filing detailed affidavits of the assessee. 3. We have heard the ld AR of the assessee as well as the ld. DR on condonation of delay in filing these appeals. The ld AR of the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed ex parte order in all these appeals and also dismissed the appeals of the assessee in limini being not maintainable as the same were not filed electronically but were filed manually. The impugned orders were passed by the ld. CIT(A) because of the reason that the authorized representative of the assessee did not appear before the ld. CIT(A) and also not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here was a delay of about 204 days in respect of five appeals for the A.Y. 2008-09 to 2012-13 and delay of 438 days in respect of two appeals for the A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15. The ld AR has further submitted that during this period, there was a recession in the jewellery business of the assessee and the assessee was adversely affected. All the bank accounts of the assessee were seized/attached by the Income Tax Department as well as the inventory was also under the custody of the department. Therefore, the assessee was passing through a bad time and was having depressed and dejected state of mind. In these adverse circumstances, the assessee was having disputes with his tax consultant and therefore, the appeals could not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ative, therefore, the assessee was aware about the impugned orders passed by the ld. CIT(A). He has further contended that the assessee has not stated the correct facts while explaining the cause of delay and therefore, there was no sufficient reason for filing the appeals belatedly. The averments made in the application for condonation of delay as well as in the affidavits are not factually correct. Even the appeals filed before the ld. CIT(A) were delayed by six days and no application for condonation of delay was filed, therefore, it is a case of gross negligence on the part of the assessee and does not fall in the category of bonafide or reasonable explanation. The ld CIT-DR has further contended that adopting a liberal view in condonin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the power to condone the delay provided under the statute is to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to the parties by disposing of the matter on merits, therefore, while considering the matters for condonation of delay, the law must be applied in a meaningful manner which subserves ends of justice and technical considerations should not come on the way of cause of substantial justice. There is no quarrel that the explanation and reasons explained for delay must be bonafide and not merely a device to cover an ulterior purpose such as laches on the part of the litigant or an attempt to save limitation in the underhand way. If the party who is seeking condonation of delay has not acted in malafide manner and reas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appeals. Thus, the reasons explained by the assessee by giving the details are found to be factually correct to the extent of the authorized representative of the assessee and non-appearance of him before the ld. CIT(A) despite six opportunities were given by the ld. CIT(A). The authorized representative keep on filing the adjournment letters but never attended the proceedings. Therefore, we find that there is nothing on record to indicate that the assessee has acted in malafide or attempted to take any advantage by filing these appeals belatedly. It is also matter of fact that the bank accounts of the assessee were attached by the department and further inventories of the assessee were also seized and lying with the department. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
