Anil Kumar Dundoo Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
Equity Cannot Override Limitation -2247-Day Delay Fatal — No Affidavits, No Evidence — Claim of CA Negligence Rejected – ITAT Refuses Condonation, Appeal Dismissed
Hyderabad Tribunal dealt with whether extraordinary delay of 2247 days in filing appeal before CIT(A) could be condoned. Assessee, a diamond & bullion trader, had been assessed u/s 143(3) on 28.12.2019 with an addition of Rs.27,62,580. Limitation for filing appeal expired on 27.01.2020. However, the appeal was filed only on 24.03.2025. Assessee explained the delay citing prolonged medical issues (joint pain, hyper-uricemia), later COVID-19 infection & hospitalisation from 26.11.2020 to 30.11.2020, recovery phase, & thereafter alleged negligence by two Chartered Accountants who failed to file the appeal. Assessee relied on SC’s COVID suo-motu extension & on Shivamma (SC) to argue that length of delay is irrelevant if cause is sufficient.
Tribunal noted that the limitation expired before 15.03.2020, hence SC’s COVID exclusion could not apply. Even after hypothetically excluding COVID period, residual delay of 1120 days remained wholly unexplained. Tribunal held that medical issues were not shown to be of such severity as to prevent filing for more than six years, & the plea of professional negligence was unsupported by affidavits from the concerned CAs. Relying on SC decisions in P.K. Ramachandran, Jharkhand Urja, Bombay HC in Vama Apparels, & ITAT Hyderabad in Matrix Sea Foods, Tribunal held that inordinate & inadequately explained delay cannot be condoned merely on equitable grounds. Accordingly, Tribunal upheld CIT(A)’s refusal to condone delay of 2247 days & dismissed the appeal.
