Substantial Justice Should be Preferred Over Technicalities: ITAT Gives Another Chance After Appeal Dismissed for 124-Day Delay:

Substantial Justice Should be Preferred Over Technicalities: ITAT Gives Another Chance After Appeal Dismissed for 124-Day Delay The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) gave one more opportunity to an assessee whose income tax appeal was rejected on technical grounds. The Tribunal held that when there is a conflict between substantial justice and technicalities, then substantial justice should be prioritised. The assessee, Ashok Mishra, filed an appeal before CIT(A) after his income tax return (ITR) was processed under section 143(1). However, his appeal was filed with a delay of 124 days. Because of this delay and non-filing of the petition seeking condonation of the delay, the CIT(A) did not admit the appeal. The appellate authority said that without a condonation petition, the appeal cannot be admitted. Therefore, the assessee approached the ITAT Delhi.

Also Read

ITAT Denies 12AB & 80G to Infosys Green Forum: CSR Is Not Charity, Even If It Incidentally Saves the Environment

During the hearing, the assessee accepted that there was indeed a delay of 124 days in filing the appeal and also accepted that he did not file the condonation application. However, the assessee argued that the delay was small and the appeal should not be rejected on a technical ground. The ITAT examined the matter and agreed with the assessee's contentions. The Tribunal ruled that Justice is more important than technical mistakes. "But when substantial justice is pitted against technicalities, substantial justice should prevail," the tribunal said.

Also Read

ITAT Delhi Quashes Section 263 Revision on 100% Disallowance of FTS to Non-Residents

Accordingly, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and sent the matter for fresh consideration. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to allow the assessee to file a condonation petition, and if the CIT(A) finds the explanation reasonable, the delay should be condoned, and the appeal should then be decided on its merits.