TUSHAR IMPEX,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 21.11.2019 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-46, Mumbai [“the learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2012-13, arising out of the assessment order dated 30.09.2016 passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”).

Briefly stated, the assessee, a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading in diamonds, was reassessed at a total income of Rs.29,33,860 after making an addition of Rs.23,71,772, being 15% of

When the appeal was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. None had appeared on the immediately preceding date of hearing either. The order-sheet further shows that, prior thereto, the appeal had been listed on seven occasions and there was no appearance on behalf of the assessee. We therefore proceed to dispose of the appeal after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and on the basis of the material available on record.

At the outset, we find that the appeal is barred by limitation. In Form No.36, the assessee has itself stated that the impugned order dated 21.11.2019 was served or communicated on 21.11.2019. The present appeal was filed on 10.06.2025. Thus, as against the period of sixty days prescribed under section 253(3) of the Act, the appeal has been filed belatedly by about 1,968 days. Though the assessee has answered in the affirmative against the column relating to delay in Form No.36, no petition seeking condonation of delay, affidavit or other material explaining the delay has been filed.

Under section 253(5) of the Act, the Tribunal may admit an appeal after expiry of the prescribed period only if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within that period. In the present case, there is neither an application seeking condonation nor any explanation whatsoever for the inordinate delay. Further, despite repeated opportunities, the assessee has remained unrepresented. In the absence of any request for condonation and any material showing

Accordingly, the appeal, being barred by limitation and unsupported by any petition for condonation of delay, is not maintainable and is dismissed in limine. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.