Delay of 3 Days in Appeal Filing Must Be Condoned to Advance Substantial Justice: ITAT Nagpur

Smt. Rashidabanu Abubaker Mitha Vs ITO (ITAT Nagpur)

The appeal relates to assessment year 2008–09 against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Nagpur, arising from proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary issue before the tribunal was the refusal by the CIT(A) to condone a delay of three days in filing the appeal. The CIT(A) had rejected the condonation request based on reasons recorded in the order.

Upon hearing both parties and examining the record, the tribunal observed that the delay was minimal and attributed by the assessee to communication gaps. The tribunal referred to the Supreme Court decision in Collector Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), which emphasizes that technical considerations should not override substantial justice and that delays should be condoned in the interest of justice.

In light of this principle, the tribunal condoned the delay and set aside the CIT(A)’s decision. The CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT NAGPUR

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2008-09 arises against the CIT(A)-1, Nagpur’s order dated 25.02.2020 passed in case no. CIT(A)-1/502/2010-11, involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.