TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reject the petition for condonation of delay. Being so, we refrain from going into other grounds of appeal on merits. Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine. - ITA No. 670/Bang/2019 - - - Dated:- 10-2-2022 - SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Ashok A. Kulkarni, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru. ORDER Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.3.2018 of the CIT(Appeals), Kalaburagi for the assessment year 2014-15 on the following grounds:- Sl. No. Grounds of appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. At the outset, it was observed that there was a delay of 310 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit stating that his CA, Shri Sharangouda Patil advised to file an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and to engage the services of Mr. Prakash R. Badiger, Advocate, Dharwad. Accordingly, Advocate was handed over the appeal papers to file the appeal. 3. Mr. Badiger, Advocate initially informed that the appeal is filed before the Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Goa, but much later, in mid March 2019 Mr. Badiger expressed his inability to file the appeal as he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y mistake in keeping the brief with me. In my eagerness or immaturity, I accepted the Income Tax brief, which I was notable to deliver. Hence, there was delay from my end, for which Dr. Madraki should not suffer. 4. Thus, according to the assessee, the delay was caused on account on the failure on the part of his earlier counsel, Mr. Prakash R. Badiger, Advocate to take steps to file appeal before the Tribunal. The delay is not attributable to the assessee. The ld. AR referred to various decisions of courts and submitted that in similar circumstances, the courts have held that wrong advise given by a professional constitutes a sufficient and reasonable cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the ld. AR prayed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the assessee has not produced any evidence of his CA, Mr. Sharanagouda Patil who advised assessee to contact Mr. Badiger, Advocate. Further, there is no evidence to suggest about the date of handing over the documents to Advocate and it is not mentioned what are the papers given to Mr. Badiger for preparation of filing of appeal and what is the advise given to the assessee during this 310 days. There is no material to suggest to suggest the professional charges so as take up filing of appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has failed to bring any material on record to prove his bonafide attempt in filing the appeal. The assessee merely furnished one letter from Mr. Badiger, Advocate for seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and do not make law. Ignorance of law is not an excuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation. Therefore the argument that the appellant did not know the true legal position is not one that can be accepted in law. . 8. Further, in the present case, there is no denial on the part of the assessee about the service of the order on the assessee and after receipt of the order of the CIT(Appeals), to whom the assessee wants to entrust the work of filing appeal before the Tribunal is his own concern and this explanation does not constitute sufficient ground to condone the delay. Therefore we find no merit in the application for condonation of delay. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the assessee has failed to make o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
