K.N. Gopala Heggade Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Technicalities Cannot Defeat Substantial Justice: ITAT Allows Delayed Appeal of Rural Senior Citizen- Email Notices Ignored by 74-Year-Old HUF Kartha – ITAT Bangalore Grants Relief & Restores Matter to NFAC
In this case, the appeal filed by Assessee was delayed by 209 days. The reason for delay was that the Kartha of the HUF, a 74-year-old senior citizen residing in a remote village near Sringeri, was unfamiliar with computers & electronic communication. All NFAC notices were issued only by e-mail, despite Assessee’s express request in Form 35 not to send notices via e-mail. Consequently, Assessee remained unaware of the CIT(A)’s order dated 29.06.2024 until the tax consultant accessed the portal on 20.02.2025.
Tribunal considered the application for condonation of delay supported by affidavit, & referred to the landmark principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Katiji (167 ITR 471), emphasizing that substantial justice must prevail over technicalities. Reliance was also placed on People Education & Economic Development Society Vs ITO (100 ITD 87) & CIT Vs K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadai (153 ITR 596), where even delays of 600 days & 21 years respectively were condoned.
Tribunal held that 209 days cannot be termed inordinate, particularly when the cause shown was reasonable. Non-condonation would amount to “legalizing an illegal & unconstitutional order”, leading to unjust enrichment of the State. Accordingly, the delay was condoned.
