Inordinate delay in tax appeals not condoned without sufficient cause and due diligence; merits irrelevant.

आदेश/ORDER

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:

Firstly, we shall take ITA No. 2794/Mum/2025, A.Y 2012-13 as lead case and facts narrated therein.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 29.03.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal ADDL/ JCIT (A)- 2 for the assessment year 2012-13. The following grounds are reproduced below:

“Ground of Appeal:

We have already filed an affidavit explaining reason for late filing of an appeal request for Condonation of Delay:

1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has completely ignored on the merit of the case, and only delt with delay in filing appeal.

2. The Appellant is a registered Co-operative Housing Society registered under Maharashtra State Co- operative Societies Act, 1960 registration No.BOM/HSG/3256 of 1971 dated 14th December, 1971, and eligible for benefit of deduction U/S 80P (2) (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3.On the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has overlooked the fact that the Appellant is eligible for the deduction U/S 80P (2) (d) of the Act and outright rejection of the case is not within the power and competence of the CPC under the provision of 143(1) (a) at the time of processing of the Return of Income rejection of claim deduction, on the basis of the Return of Income, statement and record it is out of Jurisdiction of the CPC to reject the claim.

In the view of the foregoing para-U/S 143(1) (a) the process return is based on the return of income and statement accompanied the CPC have no power to reject the claim deduction without assigning any reason and therefore an addition of Rs. 2, 15,083/- has to be deleted U/s 143(1) (a) stage which Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has completely ignore, this substantive provisions.”

2. All the grounds raised by the Assessee are interrelated and interconnected and relates to challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) in upholding the additions made by the AO, therefore we have decided to adjudicate these grounds through the present consolidated order.

We have heard the counsel for the parties and also perused the materials placed on record, at the very outset we noticed that there is a delay of 315 days (AY 2012-13) in filing the present appeal.

3. Apart from this the appeal of the Assessee before Ld. CIT(A) was also dismissed on the ground that the same was filed beyond the period of limitation and there was also delay of 3615 days.

4. On perusal of the application, filed with regard to condonation of delay we find that the only reason mentioned in the application for seeking condonation of delay is that there was dispute between the ex-committee members and the Assessee’s society and certain allegations were levelled between present committee members and the ex-committee members. It was also submitted that the members were completely hostile and non- cooperative because of which the Assessee could not file the respective documents before ld. CIT(A) and also before the ITAT within time.

5. We noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) has categorically dismissed this entire issue of condonation of delay in its order and the operative portion of which, is at Para Nos. 2 to 4 and the same is reproduced below:

2. As mentioned above, the appeal against the intimation under section 143(1) dated 27.02.2013, served on the same date, has been filed on 20.02.2023 as against the limitation date of 27.03.2013. This shows that the delay in filing the appeal as per the