Shipra Fabrics Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Present group of appeals filed by Assessee-companies of the same group pertain to various Assessment Years ranging from 2010-11 to 2016-17. There was a delay of 363 days in filing these appeals. Assessee submitted that during first appellate proceedings, vide acknowledged letter dated 27/02/2019, it had intimated CIT(A) regarding change of its e-mail id. However, notices of hearing & impugned appellate orders were all dispatched to the old email id appearing in PAN data belonging to an employee who left the organisation in 2016. As a result, Assessee could not attend the hearings before CIT(A) & could not immediately take steps to file further appeals.
DR opposed condonation, but could not controvert that the letter updating the email id was duly acknowledged by office of CIT(A). Tribunal observed that the delay was not intentional & that no material indicating malafide was placed by Revenue. Relying on the principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Katiji (167 ITR 471), Tribunal held that “sufficient cause” must be interpreted liberally to advance substantial justice, since refusing to condone delay may result in dismissal of a meritorious matter. Accordingly, Tribunal condoned the delay in all appeals.
