Case Law Details
Baskaran Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai)
In a remarkable turn of events in the case of Baskaran vs DCIT, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Chennai set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) or CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14. The initial rejection was based on the fact that the assessee’s appeal was filed 325 days late without showing any sufficient cause. Baskaran filed an appeal against this decision, explaining that the delay was due to a prolonged illness, and not wilful. This article discusses the course of events, the arguments presented, and the final decision by ITAT.
Baskaran, the Karta of the HUF, submitted that his prolonged illness prevented him from managing the day-to-day activities of the business, causing the delay in filing the appeal. Despite this, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating that the delay wasn’t sufficiently justified.
However, upon appeal to the ITAT Chennai, the Tribunal reviewed the circumstances and opined that due to the prolonged illness, there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal ruled that the delay has to be condoned and directed the CIT(A) to re-examine the case on its merits and provide an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.
Conclusion: This case underlines the importance of presenting a strong cause when filing an appeal after the due date. It also highlights the willingness of the ITAT to consider genuine reasons, such as serious illness, as acceptable causes for delay. With this order, ITAT Chennai has set a precedent for leniency in cases where the delay in appeal filing can be reasonably justified. As a result of this order, the assessee’s appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the case will be re-examined on its merits by the CIT(A).
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
