“CA has not advised to file appeal” No Valid Reason for condoning delay: ITAT

The appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by 449 days delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In the form of an affidavit, the assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Chartered Accountant of the assessee company has not advised the assessee to file the appeal. For that effect, the C.A. filed an affidavit dated 29.10.2022. Since, there is reasonable cause for the delay, the ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for condoning the delay by relying upon the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471.

On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that the assessee is a private limited company, well acquainted with Income Tax Act and procedures and they ought to have filed the appeal in time and submitted that the delay should not be condoned. He has relied upon the decision of the Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Mrs. Preeti Madhok v. ITO in I.T.A. No. 752/Chny/2019 dated 17.06.2022.

ITAT Observation:

5. We have heard both the sides, perused the condonation petition filed in the form of affidavit and case law relied upon by both the parties. Admittedly, the assessee has filed its appeal with a delay of 449 days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit, wherein it was stated that the C.A. of the assessee company has not advised the assessee to file an appeal. The C.A. has also filed an affidavit stating that he has not advised the assessee to file an appeal against the order passed by the ld. PCIT under section 263 of the Act. After examining the entire affidavit, we find that the assessee has not asked its C.A. whether to file an appeal or not. When the assessee asked the opinion of the C.A., then the C.A. has to advise as to whether an appeal has to be filed or not. No material was brought on record that the assessee has sought for the advice of the C.A. or not. In the affidavit filed by the C.A. of the assessee company, it was stated that he has not advice the assessee to file an appeal. The affidavit filed by the C.A. of the assessee company is dated 29.10.2022 and therefore, we are of the opinion that the affidavit filed by the C.A. of the assessee company is nothing but an afterthought and the explanation given by the assessee on the basis of the CA’s affidavit cannot be accepted as sufficient cause to condone the delay.

6. The case law relied on by the assessee in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji & Ors. (supra) has no application to the facts of the present case.

No Condonation of Delay in case of Assessee:

8. By considering the submissions of the ld. Counsel as well as reasons stated in the affidavit filed by the assessee for condonation of delay, we are of the considered opinion that the reasons given by the assessee in the affidavit does not come under reasonable cause for condonation of delay, as prescribed under the Act and thus, we reject the petition filed by the assessee for condonation of delay. The case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji & Ors. (supra) has no application to the facts of the present case. Since we have rejected the petition for condonation of delay of 449 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable and accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Click here to read the Order