In a recent ruling, the Vishakapatanam bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) has ruled that the 1 day delay is not a delay in filing the income tax appeal belatedly. The bench restored the gratuity addition matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)].
The assessee – appellant, Vaddadi Madhusudana Rao Visakhapatnam, aggrieved from the order passed by the first appellate authority filed an appeal. The assessee is retired from MMTC Ltd. under Voluntary Retirement Scheme, received net terminal benefits of Rs.1,08,15,275/- after deducting tax at source at Rs.14,35,169/- from the total benefits of Rs.1,22,50,444/-.
Step by Step Guidance for Tax Audit & E-filing, Click Here
Assessee filed return of income for assessment year 2020-21 on 25/11/2020 admitting income of Rs.52,31,590/- and claimed exemption of Rs.13,21,198/- in respect of gratuity.
The appellant challenged the decision of the Assessing Officer (AO) by filing an appeal, but the CIT(A) dismissed it due to a one-day delay in filing.
The CIT(A) observed that the delay could not be condoned in the absence of a reasonable cause, proper explanation, or supporting evidence. Consequently, the appeal was rejected in limine, as the appellant failed to substantiate the reasons for the delay.
Step by Step Guidance for Tax Audit & E-filing, Click Here
The tribunal heard both the parties. It stated that as per section 9(1) of The General Clauses Act, 1897 the first day in a series of days or any other period of time is excluded and hence the delay of 1 day is not a delay in filing the appeal belatedly.
It added the extract of section 9(1) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 as under :
“9. Commencement and termination of time.—(1) In any [Central Act] or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act, it shall be sufficient, for the purpose of excluding the first in a series of days or any other period of time, to use the word “from”, and, for the purpose of including the last in a series of days or any other period of time, to use the word “to”.”
In light of the principles and the judicial precedents, the bench of Balakrishnan S. (Accountant member) and K. Narasimha Chary (Judicial member) restored the matter to the CIT(A) directing to provide reasonable opportunity. The appeal was allowed accordingly.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
