Pranav B Prem

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, has dismissed a batch of six income tax appeals filed by Summit Aviation Pvt. Ltd. for Assessment Years 2011–12 to 2016–17, refusing to condone a 170-day delay in filing them. The Tribunal observed that the assessee failed to substantiate its claim that the delay was due to the professional negligence of its former Chartered Accountant. The Bench comprising Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member) and Brajesh Kumar Singh (Accountant Member) held that the explanation offered by the assessee lacked credibility and documentary support. It noted that the assessee had not produced any corroborative evidence to prove that action was taken against the Chartered Accountant or that a new one had been appointed in time to manage the company’s affairs.

Also Read: ITAT Delhi: Hotel Marketing And Reservation Fees From Indian Franchisees Not Taxable As Royalty Or Technical Services Under India–US DTAA

Background of the Case

The assessee had filed six appeals before the Tribunal challenging assessment orders for AYs 2011–12 to 2016–17. However, the appeals were filed on June 3, 2024, much beyond the prescribed limitation period, which had expired on December 17, 2023. To justify the delay, the assessee filed an application for condonation, blaming the late filing on the alleged professional negligence of its erstwhile Chartered Accountant (CA) who, according to the assessee, failed to represent the company before the tax authorities and did not file the appeals in time. The assessee further attributed the delay to several other factors, including the difficulty in retrieving company records, appointment of a new CA, involvement of former directors in civil and criminal proceedings, and medical issues faced by one of its directors, including hospitalization due to pneumonia and cardiac treatment. The company also referred to a pending suit before the Delhi High Court against a bank concerning the auction of its helicopters under the SARFAESI Act, arguing that these circumstances contributed to the delay.

Tribunal’s Observations

After examining the submissions, the ITAT found the assessee’s explanations unconvincing. It emphasized that no material evidence had been produced to corroborate any of the claims made in the condonation application. Quoting from the order, the Tribunal observed:“The fact of taking action against the Chartered Accountant or appointment of a new one, though stated, has not been corroborated by any evidence.” The Bench further noted that the assessee had not shown any diligence in pursuing its case and that its conduct before the lower authorities indicated persistent non-appearance, which weakened the credibility of its explanation. It reiterated that mere statements, unsupported by evidence, cannot justify the bona fides of the company. The order recorded: “Mere statements cannot justify the bona fides of the company. The genuineness of the conduct and contentions made by the assessee is found to be doubtful.”

The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had failed to establish any reasonable or sufficient cause for condonation of the 170-day delay. It also held that the ongoing legal disputes and personal hardships of directors were irrelevant to the late filing of tax appeals and could not be treated as valid grounds under the law. Accordingly, the ITAT declined to condone the delay and dismissed all six appeals as barred by limitation, holding that the facts and issues were identical in all cases. The ruling was made applicable mutatis mutandis across all connected appeals.

Also Read: ITAT Deletes Rs. 1,205 Crore Transfer Pricing Adjustment on Vodafone–Essar Trademark Royalty

In conclusion, the Tribunal refused to accept the assessee’s plea that delay was due to CA misconduct or external difficulties, finding no corroboration for such claims. Since no “sufficient cause” was demonstrated under law, the ITAT dismissed all six appeals filed by Summit Aviation Pvt. Ltd., confirming that procedural negligence cannot be excused without substantive proof.

Appearance

Appellant: None
Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena, CIT(DR)& Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr

Cause Title: Summit Aviation Versus DCIT

Case No: ITA Nos.2829 to 2834/Del/2024

Coram: Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member), Brajesh Kumar Singh (Accountant Member)