Kilari Jagannatham Suwresh Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
The ITAT Bangalore dismissed multiple appeals holding that inordinate delay of ~870 days cannot be condoned in absence of “sufficient cause”, despite elaborate explanations by the assessee.
The assessee attributed the delay to an employee who allegedly withheld statutory notices and failed to inform the Directors, leading to ex-parte orders. However, the Tribunal found that no credible evidence linked the employee to handling tax matters, nor was the delay period (March 2023 to March 2025) properly explained.
The Tribunal emphasized that “sufficient cause” is the sole test for condonation, and cannot be substituted by sympathy, cost, or reliance on relief granted in similar cases. It strongly relied on Supreme Court principles that limitation law is strict and cannot be diluted by equitable considerations.
Further, the Tribunal noted consistent negligence by the assessee, including non-response before AO and CIT(A), reinforcing lack of bona fide conduct. It also rejected reliance on a coordinate bench order where delay was condoned with costs, stating that cost cannot replace statutory requirement of sufficient cause.
Accordingly, the delay was not condoned, and all appeals were dismissed as unadmitted, reiterating that procedural discipline cannot be compromised for casual litigants.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
1. ITA Nos. 2250 & 2251/BANG/2025 have been filed by Kilari Jagannatham Suwresh [The Assessee/ Appellant] for assessment years 2017-18 and 202021, while ITA Nos. 2252 to 2254/BANG/2025 have been submitted by Kilari Lakshmi Suthaa[ The Assessee/ Appellant] for assessment years 2017-18, 2019-20, and 2020-21. These appeals are against the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals)-11, Bengaluru [Ld. CIT(A)] dated March 27, 2023. All appeals were filed belatedly with delays of 861 and 870 days before the ITAT.
