SAIDA,KOLLAM V. ITO,WARD 2, KOLLAM

ITA 271/COCH/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Saida Trading Co., the appellant, contesting an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre / Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 05.02.2025, related to the assessment year 2015-2016. The primary issue was the inordinate delay of 1233 days in filing the appeal against this order. The tribunal examined the reasons provided for the delay, which included the unavailability of the assessee to sign the appeal documents due to being out of station. However, this reason was deemed insufficient to justify such a significant delay. The tribunal referenced several precedents emphasizing that the power to condone delay should not be exercised to frustrate the substantial law of limitation and that the cause behind the delay, rather than the length of the delay, is crucial in such determinations.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 397258 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: H. Guruswamy Vs A.Krishna, Mool Chandra v. Union of India, Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara v. Labour Court, Bhilwara
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNDARASAN S
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.271/Coch/2025 : Asst.Year 2015-2016 Saida, Saida Trading Co. Lakshmi Nada Kollam – 691 013. PAN : EWYPS1905Q. v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 2 Kollam. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : --- None --- Respondent by : Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 27.05.2025. Date of Pronouncement : 30.05.2025 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 05.02.2025, having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2024-25/1072940009(1) and relates to the assessment year 2015-2016. 2. At the outset, we observe that there is a delay of 1233 days in filing the present appeal. There is condonation application on the letterhead of one M/s.K.Venkatachalam Aiyer & Co., in which it is mentioned that the assessee, who had to sign the appeal documents, could not be contacted due to his absence from station. Except this, no other reason has ITA No.271/Coch/2025. Saida, Saida Trading Co. 2 been given by the assessee vis-à-vis condonation of delay of 1233 days. It is a case where there is inordinate delay without any cause much a less “reasonable cause”. In our view, the reason given in the condonation petition and that too on the letterhead of Chartered Accountants without any supporting affidavit cannot constitute reasonable cause, It is settled position of law that power to condone delay should be exercised having regard to the facts of the case, the power cannot be exercised to frustrate the substantial law of limitation as held by the Apex Court recently in the case of H. Guruswamy Vs A.Krishna Civil appeal number 317 of 2025. The Hon’ble Apex Court in yet another case of Mool Chandra v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1878, decided on 5-8- 2024] has held that it is not he length of the delay rather the cause behind the delay, which is to be seen while condoning he delay. In the case of Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara v. Labour Court, Bhilwara, (2009) 3 SCC 525, it was opined that while deciding an application for condonation of delay the High Court ought not to have gone into the merits of the case. “If negligence can be attributed to the appellant, then necessarily the delay which has not been condoned by the Tribunal and affirmed by the High Court deserves to be accepted. However, if no fault can be laid at the doors of the appellant and cause shown is sufficient then we are of the considered view that both the Tribunal and the High Court were in error in not adopting a liberal approach or justice-oriented approach to condone the delay”. In the present case the cause responsible for the delay would not fall ITA No.271/Coch/2025. Saida, Saida Trading Co. 3 under the ambit of “reasonable cause” hence, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed as barred by limitation. 3. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 30th day of May, 2025. Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cochin; Dated : 30th May, 2025. Devadas G* Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Cochin. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin "