The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Amritsar Bench, has recently, in an appeal filed before it, held thatdelay in seeking permission from head office is “reasonable cause” for delay in filing appeal.
The aforesaid observation was made by the Amritsar ITAT, when a bunch of appeals were filed before it by the assessee, Punjab State Warehousing,as against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jalandhar, dated 14.08.2019, in respect of Assessment Years 2012-13 to 2014-15.
The ground of the assessee’s appeal being that the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that there was a sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal before him from 01.04.2014 to 17.07.2014, it was the pleading of the appellant that the same may hence, be condoned and the appeal be heard on merits.
Ms. Priyanka Singla, the Sr. D.R, however, stood by the orders of the CIT(A).
Hearing the contentions and thereby perusing the materials available on record, the ITAT Bench noted:
“Admittedly, the appellant has persuaded the matter with Head Office to seeking permission for filing appeal vide letterdated 04.04.2014 (Annexure-2) and a reminder forwarded to Head Office, Chd on 20/05/2014 vide Letter No: 266 (Annexure-3). It is mentioned by the appellant that Sh. Jasbir Singh (Accountant), Employee of the Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, deputed to Chandigarh personally to discuss the matter of filing appeal in stipulated time with Head Office. On receiving permission from Head Office to file an appeal, Sh. Vijay K. Malhotra & Sh. Sachin K. Malhotra, counsel advised to file the Revision petition with C1T (TDS) at Chandigarh instead of filing appeal as the date of filling Appeal before Commissioner of Appeals at Jalandhar, has stated to be expired.”
“Accordingly, to file the revision petition, again Mr. Jasbir Singh Accountant PSWC, Hoshiarpur in spite of many efforts, it took about 20 days to get the permission from the Head Office regarding filling of revision petition and the permission was finally granted on 12/07/2014, and then it engaged Sh. Vijay PL Malhotra & Sh. Sachin K- Malhotra (Advocate) as the counsel who took about 5-6 days to prepare the revision petition and filling the same on 18/07/2014. An Affidavit of the Accountant, permanent employee of Corp. Mr. Jasbir Singh is enclosed (Annexure-4). The appellant pleaded that there was a reasonable cause without any malafide intention for the said delay in filling the appeal/revision in time. The appellant being abeing a Govt. Department, it took so much time to get the permission, else there was no intention to delay in filling the appeal. It was requested to condone the delay and heard the appeals on merits. The Ld. DR although stands by the impugned order but had no objection to condonation of the delay in filing the appeals.”, the ITAT Panel further added.
“In the instant case, the appellant is a government undertaking and required to take necessary permission for filling the appeal from its head office which could not be received in time in spite of several reminders and personal deputation of staff duly supported with an affidavit. In our view, the delay in seeking permission for filing appeal in time from head office was a reasonable cause beyond the control of the appellant and accordingly we hold that the delay was not intentional or mala fide”, the ITAT Panel comprising ofAnikesh Banerjee, the Judicial Member, along withDr. M. L. Meena, the Accountant Member noted.
Thus, allowing the assessee’s appeal the Amritsar ITAT therefore held:
“In the above view, we hold that the order of the CIT(A) is perverse to the facts on record as the explanation of the appellant is held to be reasonable and justified for the delay from 1st May, 2014 to 17 July 2014. Accordingly, the disputed period of delay in filing the appeal is condoned and the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to hear and adjudicate the matter on merits afresh after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assesse and considering the material evidence on record by passing a speaking order. The appellant shall cooperate in fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). In the result, the appeals filed are allowed for statistical purpose.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
