TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2074X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be confirmed and it could be recovered. Therefore, it cannot be alleged that the assessee has adopted this modus operandi as a strategy. It might be a bona fide negligence. We condone the delay in filing the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and remit the issues to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Considering the alleged negligence in conducting the proceedings before the ld.Revenue authorities below, we impose a cost of ₹ 2,500/- upon the assessee on each appeal. - Stay Petition No.39 and 40/Ahd/2018 With ITA No.1040 and 1041/Ahd/2018 - - - Dated:- 11-5-2018 - SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri S.N. Soparkar with Shri Parin Shah For The Revenue : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Present two stay applications are directed at the instance of the assessee for grant of ad-interim stay of outstanding demand amounting to ₹ 9,73,142/- and ₹ 5,92,697/- in the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The ld.AO has passed assessment order under section 144 r.w.s. 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961 and determined total tax demand of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nternational Ltd. He underwent Craniotomy and clipping of aneurysm on 16/03/2011 and kept under observation and discharged from hospital on 28/03/2011 i.e. after almost 33 days (48 hours with ventilated support). Subsequently, he was observed by doctors from time to time. My father also lost his memory as he was operated SAH with ACOM aneurysm. Necessary papers to prove the bonafide of the appellant is attached herewith as per Annexure 1. Again in 21/08/2013, angiography was done at Apollo Hospital for heart related problems. Necessary papers to prove the bonafide of the appellant is attached herewith as per Annexure-2. Then again on 03/04/2015 to 07/04/2015, my father was admitted in Sterling Hospital for brain stroke and complete left side paralysis. Due to repetitive brain stroke and paralysis he lost, his memory and took very long time to recover from unstable mental condition, Necessary papers to prove the bonafide is attached herewith as per Annexure 3. Due to deteriorating health condition, my father loose his memory and also not able to inform me about receipt of assessment order on my behalf. At present also my father suffers from memory loss. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithin that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section 3 of section 249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld.Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon ble High Court as well as before the Hon ble Supreme Court, then, Hon ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji Others, 1987 AIR 1353: 1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. Every day's delay must be expl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi lain Vs. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575] and State of West Bengal Vs. The Administrator, Howrah Municipality [AIR 1972 SC 749]. It must be remembered that in every case of delay there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him. If the explanation does not smack of mala fides or it is not put forth as part of a dilatory strategy the court must show utmost consideration to the suitor. But when there is reasonable ground to think that the delay was occasioned by the party deliberately to gain time then the court should lean against acceptance of the explanation. While condoning delay the Could should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would have incurred quiet a large litigation expenses. It would be a salutary guideline that when courts condone the delay due to laches on the part of the applicant the court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
