ASIAN CONCIERGE TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-9-1-4, MUMBAI

Q: Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253, Section 253(3), Section 253(5)

ITA 5533/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 September 2026AY 2016-173 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that an appeal must conform to the prescribed form and manner, including filing a duly signed Memorandum of Appeal and an application for condonation of delay if time-barred. Since the assessee failed to rectify these mandatory defects despite a notice, the appeal could not be treated as validly instituted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was registered but suffered from multiple defects. These included an unsigned grounds of appeal, non-filing of the prescribed Memorandum of Appeal (Form No. 36), and the appeal being time-barred without any condonation application.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal was validly instituted before the Tribunal given the non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements and the absence of a condonation application for a time-barred appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253,Section 253(3),Section 253(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar (CIT-DR)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA 5533/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: (2016-17) ASIAN CONCIERGE TRANSPORT INCOME TAX OFFICER-9-1-4 PRIVATE LIMITED AAYKAR BHAVAN ,M K ROAD 405 LAXMI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MUMBAI-400020, MAHARASHTRA Vs. ,NEW LINK ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI-400053, MAHARASHTRA Appellant Respondent

PAN No. AAOCA1215E

Appellant represented by: NONE Respondent represented by: Shri Manoj Kumar (CIT-DR). Date of hearing: 01-09-2026 Date of pronouncement: 10-09-2026 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal has been registered by the Registry at the captioned number as arising out of the order dated 26.03.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), for Assessment Year 2016-17.

Despite notifying neither anyone attended nor was any application of adjournment was filed. Further compliance of defect notice issued by the Registry has also not been made. On perusal of the record, the following infirmities are noticed in the

ITA 5533/MUM/2026 ASIAN CONCIERGE TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED appeal as filed:(i) the copy the grounds of appeal placed on record is unsigned;(ii) although the Statement of Facts has been filed, the Memorandum of Appeal in Form No. 36, being the prescribed proforma under Rule 47 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 read with section 253 of the Act, has not been filed; (iii) the appeal is stated to be time-barred, and no application seeking condonation of the delay, supported by an affidavit disclosing sufficient cause as contemplated under section 253(5) of the Act, has been filed.

We are of opinion that an appeal before this Tribunal must conform to the form and manner prescribed under section 253 of the Act read with Rule 47 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, which mandates filing of the Memorandum of Appeal in Form No. 36, duly signed and verified, accompanied by the grounds of appeal in the prescribed form. Filing of an appeal beyond the limitation period prescribed under section 253(3) of the Act further requires a formal application for condonation of delay demonstrating sufficient cause, in the absence of which the appeal cannot be treated as validly instituted.

In the present case, the appeal as filed suffers from the cumulative defects noted above (i) absence of signed grounds of appeal, (ii) non-filing of Form No. 36, and absence of any application for condonation of delay and (iii) is not in the form prescribed by the Rules. The registry had already issued a defect notice to the appellant affording an opportunity to rectify the same, but the assessee failed to remove the aforesaid defects, including filing of Form No. 36 in the prescribed form together

ITA 5533/MUM/2026 ASIAN CONCIERGE TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED

with an application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit, within a period to be specified therein. Accordingly, in the absence of compliance with the mandatory requirements governing institution of an appeal, the present appeal cannot be treated as a validly instituted appeal before the Tribunal. Accordingly, the same is rejected as unadmitted and not maintainable.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is rejected as unadmitted. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10/09/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 10/09/2026 Saumya , Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →