SMT. NIRUPAMA YOGESHBHAI GUPTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), AHMEDABAD

At the outset, it is noticed that none has appeared on behalf of the assessee on the date of hearing and no application for adjournment was moved. Therefore, we have to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte with the assistance of ld. departmental representative and the material placed Page No 2 Smt.Nirupama Yogeshbhai Gupta vs. ITO on record. At the very outset our attention was drawn to the fact that instant appeal filed by the assesee was time barred by 137 days. The order of the ld. CIT(A) was communicated to the assessee on 8th December, 2016. The appeal before the Tribunal was to be filed within a period of 60 days. However, the assessee has filed the instant appeal on 23rd June, 2017. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee was delayed by 137 days. After examination of the material on record, it is noticed that a number of notices were served upon the assessee. As per record neither assessee has attended on the date of hearing on 8th Jan, 2019, 26th Feb, 2019, 26th April, 2019, 24th June, 2019 nor filed any adjournment applications. It was brought to the notice of the assessee vide acknowledgment cum notice that the appeal filed by the asssessee was time barred by 137 days and it was also informed that asssessee has not filed condonation petition. However, till date of last hearing in this case on 24th June, 2019 the assessee has not filed any application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal by 137 days. After examination of the entire material, the assessee could not bring on record any evidence or reason to demonstrate that he was prevented by whatsoever circumstances or there was sufficient cause for not fling appeal in time which was late by 137 days. Although as per the provisions of section 253(5) of Income Tax Act, an appeal before the Tribunal after the expiry of statutory period from the date of the order can be admitted if the assessee satisfied that the assessee has sufficient cause for not presenting appeal within time. In the case of Ramlal vs. Reva Coal Fields Ltd. [AIR 1962 (SC) 361], the Hon’ble Supreme Court have held that condonation is not a matter of right and there has to be a reasonable cause for the same. Similarly observations were made by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the Page No 3 Smt.Nirupama Yogeshbhai Gupta vs. ITO case of Madhu Dadha vs. ACIT (2014) 186 taxman 88 (2009) 317 ITR 458. In view of the above facts and finding, the question regarding whether there is a cause or not which depends upon each case and primarily is a question of fact to be considered taking into account totality of events which had taken place in a particular case. Since no cogent and satisfactory explanation has been furnished by the assessee for delay of 137 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee is delayed being time barred by 137 days, and the same is dismissed

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27-06-2019