Gulmohar Distributors Pvt Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
Conclusion: In present facts of the case, the condonation of delay was allowed for 902 days by placing its reliance over the Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court and it was observed that Income-tax law is a complex subject and meeting its compliance requirements is dependent on services by experts of the subject matter. Accordingly the delay was condoned and the appeal was allowed on merits.
Facts: The said appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-12, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 84/CIT(A)-12/Kol./Ward-9(2)/2016-17 dated 10.07.2017 passed against the assessment order by ITO, Ward-9(2), Kolkata u/s.143(3)/147/263/144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 20.03.2015.
The appeal was barred by limitation by 902 days for which petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit was placed on record. In the petition for condonation of delay, it was stated that director of the assessee relied upon the professional competency of its authorised representative for taking appropriate action as the director was not competent to understand and deal with the taxation matters of the assessee company. Authorised representative inadvertently missed to file the appeal in time for which an affidavit by the authorised representative explaining the reason is also placed on record.
The Hon’ble ITAT observed that Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a ‘sufficient cause’ for not presenting it within that period.
The Hon’ble ITAT places its reliance over the Hon’ble Supreme Court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji& Others, 1987 AIR 1353, wherein it was observed as under:
