Indira Sastry, a resident of Bangalore, contested the Commissioner of Income-Tax Appeals’ decision regarding the condonation of delay in filing an appeal for the assessment year 2013-14. The tribunal assessed the merits of the case and the procedural aspects concerning the delay in appeal filing.
The appeal was filed against an order dated 10.08.2022 by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-42, New Delhi, which dismissed Sastry’s appeal in limine on grounds of an 18-day filing delay.
The primary contention in this case was the dismissal of the appeal by the Commissioner without considering a condonation petition attached to the electronically filed Form No. 35. The petitioner argued that despite not mentioning the delay explicitly in Form No. 35, a separate condonation petition was attached, outlining sufficient reasons for the delay.
The tribunal, led by Judicial Member Shaktijit Dey, criticized the Commissioner’s approach as overly technical and not in the spirit of justice. Emphasizing the importance of addressing cases on their merits, the tribunal set aside the Commissioner’s order and remanded the case for a substantive hearing on merits, stressing the legal principle that courts should resolve cases based on substantive justice over procedural technicalities.
This case underscores the judiciary’s role in ensuring that administrative errors do not deny litigants the opportunity for a fair hearing. It also highlights the need for litigants to provide clear and timely justifications for procedural delays in the judicial system.
Appeal Delay Condonation: Indira Sastry vs ACIT, Assessment Year 2013-14
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform