Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (5) TMI 830

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... see has marched this appeal on the following grounds:- "1. The impugned penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) dated 20.03.2020 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same kindly be quashed. 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in dismissing the appeal holding that the same was barred by limitation u/s 249(2) of the Act without appreciating the facts and the judicial guideline available on this subject. Hence the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) may be quashed and the appeal may be held as maintainable before the First Appellate Authority. 3. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in not providing any opportunity at all of bei .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t has filed the appeal on 02.06.2020 against the order received on 20.03.2020, which is belated as per Section 249(2) of the I.T.Act, 1961. Moreover, the appellant in para no. 14 of Form 35 has answered 'No' in response to the query that 'whether there is delay in filing appeal? In this way the appellant has misrepresented the facts in respect of the delay in filing of first appeal, hence the appeal filed by the appellant is barred by limitation. Considering the above facts, it is clear that there is no reasonable cause of delay in filing the appeal. Hence, the appeal of the appellant is not admitted and condonation of delay is not granted. 4. As a result, the appeal is dismissed. " 5. As the assessee has not found any favour from the ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Hon'ble Court that "in the case the limitation has expired after 15.03.2020 then the period from 15.03.2020 till the date on which the lockdown is lifted in the jurisdictional area where the dispute lies or where the cause of action arises shall be extended for a period of 15 days after the lifting of lockdown." Even thereafter, the Hon'ble Court had been extending time limits again and again for all the concerned to complete their actions which were getting barred by limitation as also time limit for filing replies and making compliance for the notices were also extended. Recently the Hon'ble Court passed an order dated 10.01.2022 in Suo motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 on the issue of law of limitation by observing as follows: .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he receipt of the Order CIT(A) to 2nd June,2020, (date of filing of the appeal before the CIT(A)) was covered by the Covid period and by the aforesaid judgements of the Hon'ble Apex Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court itself considered the Covid-Period to be the best reasonable cause contributing the delay and granted condonation of delay in all the case. Therefore, the CIT(A) incorrectly held that there was no reasonable cause of delay moreover it is also wrong to say appellant misrepresented the facts because in this view of the matter the appellant correctly said that there was no delay. Hence, the above the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall be quashed and the matter be restored to its file for the decision in merits." 6. In addition, the ld. AR .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... period shall apply.'' We find that there is nationwide Covid 19 Pandemic situation which is beyond the control of the human being and the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause in not filing the appeal in time and the ld. CIT(A) should have considered this aspect of the case while deciding the appeal of the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji, 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- ''The Legislature has conferred power to condone delay by enacting section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, in order to enable the courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on merits. The expression " sufficient cause " in section 5 is adequately elastic to enable the courts to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urt as referred here in above, we deem it fit the interest of justice to restore the matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide on this merit of the case. Therefore, we set a side the matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal of the assesses on merits. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the ld. CIT(A) in deciding the appeal on merits and without sufficient reason, not to take further adjournments. Before parting, we may make It clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having an reflection or expression on merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) independently in accordance with the l .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates