Case Law Details
Raghupathy Dhakshayani Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Introduction: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Chennai recently pronounced an order on the appeal filed by Raghupathy Dhakshayani against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Chennai. The appeal, related to the assessment year 2016-17, faced a delay of 1161 days, leading to a petition for condonation of delay.
Detailed Analysis: The assessee, represented by Shri Anandd Babunath, CA, argued that the delay was due to reasons beyond control, primarily the assessee’s residence in Pune until January 2023. The delay allegedly resulted from the failure of communication regarding the appeal order, received by the brother-in-law, Shri Raja Balu. However, the Senior DR, Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT, opposed the petition, asserting that the reasons provided were vague and unreasonable.
The tribunal considered both arguments and emphasized that rules of limitation aim to prevent dilatory tactics and ensure prompt remedy-seeking. Despite the substantial delay, the assessee’s reasons were deemed insufficient for condonation. The tribunal highlighted the assessee’s presence in India during the period and her active participation in the case before the AO and Ld.CIT(A). The casual approach adopted by the assessee in meeting statutory timelines led to the dismissal of the petition for condonation of delay.
Conclusion: On October 30, 2023, the ITAT Chennai dismissed the appeal filed by Raghupathy Dhakshayani, emphasizing the lack of reasonable cause for the substantial delay of 1161 days. The decision underscores the importance of timely compliance with statutory provisions and the need for parties to explain each day of delay in filing appeals.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
