| COURT: | ITAT Delhi |
| CORAM: | Anadee Nath Misshra (AM), H. S. Sidhu (JM) |
| SECTION(S): | 253(3), 254 |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | Condonation of delay |
| COUNSEL: | Neelkanth Khandelwal |
| DATE: | October 31, 2019 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | February 8, 2020 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2009-10 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 253(3) Condonation of delay: The tendency to perceive delay as a non-serious matter should be discouraged. The notion that the ITAT should always condone the delay should not be promoted. For mistake of lawyer to serve as valid consideration for the purpose of condonation of delay, the mistake must be such as may be made by a professional lawyer well-versed and experienced in law. "Useless advice" by a professional to not file appeal and to instead file a Cross Objection if Revenue filed the appeal cannot help the assessee because there was always going to be a chance that Revenue might not file appeal. Counsel must disclose the circumstances in which incorrect advice was given and, it is not sufficient to make a perfunctory and general statement that wrong advice was given bonafide (all judgements considered) | |
It is not as if mistake of a legal advisor, however, gross and inexcusable, will entitle an assessee to condonation of delay in filing of appeal. The facts of the case are to be examined to ascertain if there had been negligence or gross want of skill, competence or knowledge on the part of the legal advisor; or whether there was only a mistake that even a skilled legal advisor, well-versed and experienced in law might make that mistake. It is only in the latter case that an assessee may justifiably seek condonation of delay
Recent Comments