MAHANAGAR VYAPARI NAGRIK PATSANSTHA MARYADIT ,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, 27(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3483/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mahanagar Vyapari Nagrik Patsanstha Maryadit, a cooperative credit society, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A) that dismissed their appeal due to a significant delay in filing. The delay was attributed to the society's unfamiliarity with a new ITA portal and disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Tribunal considered the impact of the pandemic and technical issues with the ITA portal as valid reasons for the delay, emphasizing that substantial justice should not be denied on technical grounds. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by precedents set by the Supreme Court regarding the exclusion of time during the pandemic for legal proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26625 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 25-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 08-07-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Misc. app. No. 21/2022 in Misc. app No. 665/2021 in suo-moto W.P(c) No. 3/2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: . R. M. BRINDHA
• Assessee Lawyers: . KUMAR KALE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 250; 143(1); 80P

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3483/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year : 2018–19) Mahanagar Vyapari Nagrik Patsanstha Maryadit Shop No. 1, Municipal Colony, Khardeo Nagar, Chembur, Mumbai-400071. Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 27(2)(1) IT office Vashi Railway Station Building, Navi Mumbai-400705. PAN/GIR No. AAAAM9636R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Mr. Kumar Kale, Adv. Revenue by Shri. Smt. R. M. Brindha, Addl. JCIT (Virtual Mode) Date of Hearing 25/09/2024 Date of Pronouncement 01/10/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (J.M): 1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 17.05.2024 passed in Appeal no. ADDL/JCIT (A)-2 BENGALURU/10005/2017-18 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income–tax(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] u/s. 250 of the Income- ITA no.3483/MUM/2024 Mahanagar Vyapari Nagrik Patsanstha Maryadit 2 tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as \"Act\"] for the Assessment year [A.Y.] 2018-19, wherein learned CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal upon rejection of delay condonation application. 2. The brief facts related to the appeal state that the assessee co- operative credit society filed return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 after deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. The intimation order u/s. 143(1) of the Act was processed on 22.10.2019, wherein the demand of Rs. 6,11,170/- was raised by the revenue against which assessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(A) on 10.04.2024 by a delay of about 1601 days. Assessee prayed for the condonation of delay in filing first appeal on the ground that the assessee society was not conversant with the change of the new ITA portal and the society was of the view that it will get the usual deduction u/s. 80P of the Act, which was denied by the CPC. It was also submitted before learned CIT(A) that the wide spread global pandemic covid-19 was also one of the reason for the delay in filing first appeal. Learned CIT(A) was however not impressed with the reasons disclosed for the delay in filing first appeal and dismissed assessee’s appeal upon rejection of the prayer for the condonation of delay. 3. Assessee has filed this appeal on the ground that learned JCIT(A) has erred in not condoning the delay without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4. In response to the notice issued by the tribunal, learned DR appeared and participated in the hearing. ITA no.3483/MUM/2024 Mahanagar Vyapari Nagrik Patsanstha Maryadit 3 5. We have perused the records and heard learned representative for both the parties. 6. Learned AR has submitted that the assessee filed delay condonation application before learned CIT(A) on the ground that most of the part of duration fell under the period of spread of global pandemic covid-19. During the period the income tax department switched over to the new income tax portal by replacing old one. The new portal was slow, this was beyond the control of the assessee. Learned AR has prayed to condone the said delay and set aside the impugned order and direct learned CIT(A) to pass the order on merit afresh. 7. Learned DR has supported the impugned order. 8. We notice that the intimation order u/s. 143(1) of the Act was processed on 22.10.2019, wherein the demand of Rs. 6,11,170/- was raised by the revenue against which assessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(A) on 10.04.2024 by a delay of about 1601 days. 9. We take judicial notice of the fact that most of the duration of delay caused in filing appeal before the first appellate authority overlaps the period of spread of global pandemic COVID-19. This fact has also been taken care of by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Misc. app. No. 21/2022 in Misc. app No. 665/2021 in suo-moto W.P(c) No. 3/2020 in civil original jurisdiction and in re-cognizance of extension of limitation with miscellaneous application No. 29/2022, in miscellaneous application No. 655/2021 in suo-moto petition(c) no. 03/2020 and vide para 5(1) of its order dated 10.01.2022, directed that ITA no.3483/MUM/2024 Mahanagar Vyapari Nagrik Patsanstha Maryadit 4 its order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent order dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purpose of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi judicial proceedings after exclusion of the aforesaid duration. Learned CIT(A) has still not condoned the delay of remaining about less than 800 days. 10. It is well established principle of law that the substantial justice cannot be denied on technical aberrations. In an adversial justice system like ours, no party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in the process of justice dispensation. Justice is the goal of jurisprudence. Any interpretation which eludes or frustrates the recipient of justice can not to be followed. The technical glitches, in the IT portal, change of representative (ITP), are the addl grounds in addition to the ground related to the spread of COVID-19, shown by the assessee. In the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and to advance the cause of justice, we, deem it just and proper to condone the delay of aforesaid remaining days. We, accordingly condone the said delay in filing the first appeal before the first appellate authority. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 17.05.2024 is set aside. The delay in filing the first appeal stands condoned. We restore the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) for passing order afresh on merit in ITA no.3483/MUM/2024 Mahanagar Vyapari Nagrik Patsanstha Maryadit 5 accordance with law. Needless to say that the first appellate authority shall ensure the substantial compliance of the principles of natural justice. Order pronounced on 01.10.2024. Sd/- (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) Sd/- (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 01/10/2024 Anandi Nambi, Steno Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// "