Resham Gramodyog Sadan Vs ITO (ITAT Raipur)
Justice-Oriented Approach Prevails – Tribunal Condoned Long Delays- ITAT Raipur Restores Appeal – Delay of 1434 + 308 Days Condoned
Assessee, a Gramodyog unit, had delayed filing of appeal before Tribunal by 308 days. An affidavit explained difficulties due to lack of familiarity with departmental e-proceeding systems, which Revenue fairly conceded as genuine. Tribunal condoned the delay citing SC in Vidya Shankar Jaiswal v. ITO (SLP (C) 26310-26311/2024), Jagdish Prasad Singhania v. Addl. CIT (TDS) (Tax Case No. 17/2025), & Inder Singh v. State of MP (SLP (C) 6145/2024).
It further noted that appeal before CIT(A) itself was delayed by 1434 days. Assessee explained that most of this period overlapped with COVID pandemic, & for the remaining period it awaited disposal of rectification petition u/s 154 which was rejected on 08.09.2023. The appeal before CIT(A) was then filed on 21.10.2023, i.e., within a month. Tribunal held that bona fide reasons existed & delay deserved condonation u/s 249(3).
Since CIT(A) had dismissed appeal only on ground of delay without addressing merits, ITAT held that such approach violated mandate of s.250(6) & s.251. Citing Bombay HC in CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (297 CTR 614), it reiterated that CIT(A) cannot summarily dismiss appeal for delay or non-prosecution but must adjudicate on merits. Reference was also made to SC in Raheem Shah v. Govind Singh (Civil Appeal No. 4628/2023), stressing justice-oriented approach over technicalities.
