Boutique Hotel India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT ( 2020) 180 ITD 817 /187 DTR 353 / 204 TTJ 525 (Delhi)(Trib), www. Itatonline.org

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal – Condonation of delay of 318 days- Delay “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- Delay is not condoned .[ S.253(3), 254(1) ]

Dismissing the appeal for not condoning the delay of 318 days the Tribunal held that , 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  ( ITA No.7042/Del/2014, dt. 31.10.2019)(AY. 2009-10)