IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of an appeal on technical grounds without considering the substantial justice and violation of principles of natural justice amounts to a violation of the legal framework.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner, a Co-operative Society, is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short). The petitioner filed its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 and claimed deduction under Section 80P of the Act. The 2nd respondent, the Assessing Officer, completed the assessment and passed Ext. P1 order under Section 143(3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed by the petitioner under Section 80P.

2. Against Ext. P1, the petitioner preferred Ext. P2 appeal under Section 246A of the Act in Form No. 35 before the 1st respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In Ext. P2, the petitioner has stated that there is delay of 12 days in filing the appeal and the ground for condonation of delay is shown as under;

“Delay of 12 days due to the non availability of our legal consultant who was out of station due to some personal reasons.”

3. The 1st respondent, by Ext. P3 order, refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine stating that the application does not explain the reasons, much less demonstrate sufficient cause for condoning the delay, whereas it is settled position of law that the assessee is duty bound to explain each day's delay after the last date of limitation. Referring to various decisions of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, the High Courts and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the 1st respondent has held as under:

“5.8 In view of the foregoing discussion, factual matrix and the judicial precedents, I find that no case has been made out by the assessee for existence of sufficient cause in the application for condonation of period of delay of 11 days in filing of appeal. I also find that it is also a settled position of law that the delay is un-excusable unless sufficient cause is shown. I further find that proper explanation and reasons for delay have not been given. Therefore, I am of the view that in the absence of existence of reasonable cause and also in the absence of proper explanation and reasons, without being supported by proper evidence, the appeal filed by the assessee late by 11 days, the delay is not condonable. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is not admitted and the same is dismissed in limine.”

4. Ext. P3 order is impugned in the writ petition contending, inter alia, that dismissing the statutory appeal in limine by refusing to condone the delay of 11 days is arbitrary and illegal and that the appellate authority went wrong in relying on judgments which are irrelevant and not applicable to the facts of the case. It is also contended that Ext. P3 has been passed in total disregard to the principles of natural justice.

5. Heard Smt. Mini. G, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Cyriac Tom, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

6. Against an order passed by the assessing authority under Section 143(3), an appeal lies to the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 246A of the Act. Section 249 (2) of the Act provides that where the appeal relates to any assessment or penalty, the appeal shall be presented within thirty days of service of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. Section 249 (3) of the Act provides that the Commissioner (Appeals) may admit an appeal after the expiration of the period provided under Section 249 (2), if he is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the said period.

7. The reason stated by the petitioner for condoning the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal is the non availability of their legal consultant. The 1st respondent has refused to accept this reason, observing that the non availability of legal consultant and the appellant's unawareness of the appeal proceedings are not valid excuses, as the time allowed under the Act is based on all such factors.

8. Filing an appeal in tax matters may require legal and technical assistance. The taxation laws and the procedures involved in filing an