Case Law Details
Case Name : DCIT Vs M/s. Trade Apartment Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata)
Appeal Number : IT Appeal No. 46/KOL/2011
Date of Judgement/Order : 08/07/2015
Related Assessment Year : 2007-08
Brief of the case:
- The ITAT Kolkata in the case of DCIT Vs. Trade Apartment Ltd. held that the delay in filling appeal cannot be condoned if the same is attributable to gross negligence and inaction on the part of revenue.
- Thus, in the present case where the revenue got active only in last few days of filling appeal and thus, delay occurred. Such delay cannot be condoned because of negligence and inaction on the part of revenue.
Facts of the case:
- The Revenue filed an application to ITAT for condoning a delay of 15 days in filling appeal against the order of CIT (Appeals). The office of CIT Kolkata-II received the order of the CIT (Appeals) on 28.10.2010, while the appeal was filed before the Tribunal on 11.01.2011.
- Revenue prayed to condone the delay in filing the appeal on the ground that the delay was due to late receipt of direction from CIT to file appeal . Further, the CIT got late in issuing directions because of disposing a bunch of appellate orders from the office of CIT(Appeals).
Contention of Revenue:
- The delay was due to late receipt of directions from the office of CIT where also there was huge pendency of about 200 time barring cases to be completed by 31.12.2010 .As such the delay was not deliberate.
- There was sufficient cause for the delay and it is prayed that the same may be condoned in the interest of justice.
Contention of Assessee:
The delay in filling appeals cannot be condoned mechanically just because the praying party is revenue. The fact that there is huge work pressure of meeting targets and deadlines is not a reasonable cause to pray for condonation.
Held by ITAT Kolkata:
- The revenue has been praying for delay in filling appeal against the order of CIT(Appeals). The reason for condoning delay as filed by revenue is that the appeal could not be filed because of delay in receipt of direction from the office of Commissioner of Income Tax , Kolkata-II to challenge the order of CIT(A).
- The delay cannot be condoned if there has been negligence or inaction on the part of Revenue. The facts of the case reveal that the order of CIT (A) was received well in time by CIT Kolkata-II and for a period of more than 1.5 months no action taken by office of CIT and it is only in last few days of limitation period there was some action taken to challenge the order of CIT(A) which resultantly caused delay because of procedural formalities.
- The delay in filling is, thus, a clear case of gross negligence and inaction on the part of the Revenue.
- ITAT also relied on the decision Hon’ble’ Supreme Court in the case of Chief Post Master General & Another vs. Living Media India Limited wherein the court took the view that delay in foiling appeal cannot be condoned if it is attributable to government machinery working in a particular fashion causing delay.
- In result the appeal filed by revenue dismissed without going into merits of case.