SHRI. BABULAL MISHRIMALJI MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO-19(1)(2), MUMBAI, MATRU MANDIR

Date of Hearing – 21/12/2023 Date of Order – 29/12/2023

O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M.

The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the separate impugned orders of even date 08/06/2018, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–54, Mumbai, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011–12.

2. At the outset, we observe that both the appeals filed by the assessee are delayed by 1821 days. Along with the appeals, the assessee has also filed his affidavit seeking condonation of delay in filing the present appeals. For reference, the submission made in the affidavit is reproduced as under:-

Shri Babulal Mishrimal Mehta ITA no.2733/Mum./2023 ITA no.2735/Mum./2023 “Subject: Condonation of delay in submission of appeal before your honor My affidavit detailing the aforesaid facts and these may kindly be placed before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal for condonation of the delay in submission of the appeal. We pray for condoning the delay as the delay was not intentional neither willful and was due to sufficient reasons laid down in the affidivit underneath. Before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai Affidavit of Mr./Ms. Shri Babulal Mishrimalji Mehta Proprietor of C.M Metal Corporation.. Thai I the above named deponent am well conversant with the facts deposed to below. That the appeal filed by the Assesse Company before the Commissioner (Appeals) was disposed of by order dated 08.06.2018 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Mrs. Sunita Billa.

4. Due to intervening circumstances like Covid 19, he assured us that all the income tax appeals have been delayed and he is in totally in touch with the Department and asked us to be rest assured.

3. As per the assessee, he is not conversant with the law and had requested his accountant to do the needful, who had assured him time and again that he was pursuing the matter. It is further submitted that due to intervening circumstances like the COVID-19 pandemic, his accountant assured him that all the Income Tax appeals have been delayed. Only on receipt of the recovery notice from the Department, the assessee engaged the Shri Babulal Mishrimal Mehta ITA no.2733/Mum./2023 ITA no.2735/Mum./2023 new Chartered Accountant who upon checking the portal informed that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee. Accordingly, the present appeals were prepared and filed before the Tribunal. In view of the above submissions, the assessee sought condonation of delay of 1821 days in filing the present appeals.

4. From the perusal of the impugned order, we find that before the learned CIT(A) except on one occasion, when the assessee’s counsel sought an adjournment, there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record. During the hearing before us, the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”) submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) in both the assessment years was not received by the assessee and only after receipt of the recovery notice, the assessee came to know about the impugned orders and proceeded to file the present appeals.

5. On the contrary, the learned Departmental Representative (“learned DR”) furnished the communication dated 12/12/2023 from the office of the learned CIT(A), wherein it has been submitted that the appeal orders for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 in the case of the assessee were dispatched by speed post and the same were duly delivered and received at the address given by the assessee on 12/07/2018.