ABS Fujitsu General Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
ITAT Bangalore directed CIT(A) to condone delay of 484 days in filing of an appeal and consider the issue on merits as it is alleged that the addition is made due to incorrect reporting by auditor.
Facts- The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning activities and performs AMC services. The return of the assessee was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in which an addition of Rs. 44,84,06,342/-was made. The assessee filed a petition for rectification u/s. 154 of the Act stating that the impugned addition has not been claimed as a deduction in the P&L Account and is a disclosure in the financial statements as contingent liability. AO rejected the petition made u/s. 154 and upheld the addition made in the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act.
There was a delay of 484 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Thus, CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without condoning the delay. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Held that it is a settled legal position that when substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have vested right for injustice being done because of non deliberate delay. Further it is a widely accepted principle that in construing the expression “sufficient cause” the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance and the expression “sufficient cause” should receive a liberal construction. In view of the facts peculiar to the case and considering the submission of the ld AR that the addition is made based on incorrect reporting by the auditor, we are inclined to direct the CIT(A) to condone the delay and consider the issue on merits.
