Gopal Krishna Sahu v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward Kanker, Government Of India, Ministryof Finance, Income Tax Department, Office Of Income Tax Officer,Ward Kanker, Chhattisgarh. Of

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR TAXC No. 71 of 2024 Gopal Krishna Sahu S/o Ghana Ram Sahu, aged about 36 yearsPAN- CSIPS9903G, R/o- H. No. 10, Main Road, Narharpur, Kanker-494334, Chhattisgarh. ---- Appellant Versus 1. The Income Tax Officer, Ward Kanker, Government of India, Ministryof Finance, Income Tax Department, Office of Income Tax Officer,Ward Kanker, Chhattisgarh. of Finance, Income Tax Department, Office of Income Tax Officer,Ward Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 2. Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CentralBoard for Direct Taxes (CBDT), Income Tax Department, New Delhi. Board for Direct Taxes (CBDT), Income Tax Department, New Delhi. ---- Respondents For Appellant :Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ayushi Agrawal, Advocate and Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : Ms. Naushina Afrin Ali, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Amit Chaudhari, Advocate No. 1 : Ms. Naushina Afrin Ali, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Amit Chaudhari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board Per Goutam Bhaduri, Judge 09. 04.2024 Heard. 1. The Substantial Question which arises for consideration in thisappeal is ‘as to whether the dismissal of the appeal by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal is only on the ground of limitationwas justified?appeal is ‘as to whether the dismissal of the appeal by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal is only on the ground of limitationwas justified? 2. The facts which led to a lis is that pursuant to a notice issuedinitially for the year 2016-17, an assessment order was passedon 24.10.2019. The appeal was filed before the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, thatwas also dismissed on 13.09.2023. Thereafter, the appeal waspreferred under Section 253 of Income Tax Act, with a delay of16 days as it was not filed within a period of 16 days. The appealought to have been filed on or before 10.11.2023, but it was filedon 27.11.2023. initially for the year 2016-17, an assessment order was passedon 24.10.2019. The appeal was filed before the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, thatwas also dismissed on 13.09.2023. Thereafter, the appeal waspreferred under Section 253 of Income Tax Act, with a delay of16 days as it was not filed within a period of 16 days. The appealought to have been filed on or before 10.11.2023, but it was filedon 27.11.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that Section 253sub Section 5 of Income Tax Act, 1961, gives the AppellateTribunal, a jurisdiction to condone the delay if sufficient cause isshown. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has gone intothe fact prior to the date of expiry of limitation and it held thatthose period has not been properly explained, which cannot beconsidered in view of judgment of Supreme Court in the case ofShrimant Jadhavrao Anandrao Pawar and Others v. DilipBalvantrao Pawar and Another reported in AIR 2003 Supremesub Section 5 of Income Tax Act, 1961, gives the AppellateTribunal, a jurisdiction to condone the delay if sufficient cause isshown. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has gone intothe fact prior to the date of expiry of limitation and it held thatthose period has not been properly explained, which cannot beconsidered in view of judgment of Supreme Court in the case ofShrimant Jadhavrao Anandrao Pawar and Others v. DilipBalvantrao Pawar and Another reported in AIR 2003 Supreme Court 2176. He would submit that in order to advance the causeof justice on merit, the delay of 16 days, which is not exorbitant,may be condoned. Court 2176. He would submit that in order to advance the causeof justice on merit, the delay of 16 days, which is not exorbitant,may be condoned. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the argument andsubmit that bonafidely it has been explained and the order of thelearned Tribunal is well merited, which do not call for anyinterference. submit that bonafidely it has been explained and the order of thelearned Tribunal is well merited, which do not call for anyinterference. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. The short question which falls for consideration is as to whetherthe appeal should have been entertained by condoning the delayof 16 days by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.the appeal should have been entertained by condoning the delayof 16 days by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 7. We went through the application, wherein the reasons for delayhas been explained. The reasons have been assigned thatbecause of the Diwali Festival, the offices were closed and it wasfollowed by General Assembly Elections, due to which, theconsultancy was hampered and the appeal could not be filedwithin the time. It has been submitted further that thoughdefective appeal was preferred on 10.11.2023, but it was notprosecuted and subsequently fresh appeal was preferred.has been explained. The reasons have been assigned thatbecause of the Diwali Festival, the offices were closed and it wasfollowed by General Assembly Elections, due to which, theconsultancy was hampered and the appeal could not be filedwithin the time. It has been submitted further that thoughdefective appeal was preferred on 10.11.2023, but it was notprosecuted and subsequently fresh appeal was preferred. 8. Without further going into the issue and taking into the fact thatno exorbitant delay has occurred, even otherwise Section 253no exorbitant delay has occurred, even otherwise Section 253 sub-Section (5) of I.T. Act, gives the power to Appellate Tribunalto condone the delay and in order to advance the cause of justiceon merit, considering the reasons stated in application tocondone the delay, we deem it proper that the delay in filing theappeal is required to be condoned, to give the appellant, to getthe adjudication on merits. 9. Accordingly, the order dated 31.01.2024 is set aside. The case isremanded back to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur foradjudication on merits. The parties shall appear before theTribunal on 07.05.2024. 10. Accordingly, the case is allowed. Sd/- Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Saurabh