JALMAYUR COOP HSG SOC LTD,NEPEANSEA ROAD vs. CIT(APPEAL), MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H(SMC)” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 445/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Jalmayur COOP HSG CIT (Appeal) SOC Ltd Piramal Chamber, Laxmivilas, 87/A Vs. Mumbai, Malabar Hili, Mumbai Mumbai-400 021 Maharashtra-400006 PAN/GIR No. AAAAJ3383N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement 29.06.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Office of Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal - Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Visakhapatnam[hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)"], vide order dated 17.10.2025 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]for Assessment Year 2015-16, arising out of the intimation issued by CPC, Bengaluru under section 143(1) of the Act dated 18.04.2017.

2 ITA No. 445/Mum/2026 Jalmayur Coop HSG SOC Ltd. 2. Briefly stated, the assessee is a co-operative housing society. The return of income for Assessment Year 2015-16 was filed under section 139(4) on 13.01.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 13,990/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) vide intimation dated 18.04.2017 whereby deduction claimed under Chapter VI-A was not allowed and the total income was determined at Rs. 63,990/-. Consequential tax demand was also raised. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid intimation, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), however, noticed that the appeal before him was filed with a delay of about 2862 days and, finding the explanation furnished by the assessee to be unsatisfactory, declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine vide order dated 17.10.2025 passed under section 250 of the Act. 4. The appeal was thereafter filed before the Tribunal. The Registry has reported that there is a delay of 19 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. However, no petition seeking condonation of delay supported by any affidavit or explanation has been filed by the assessee. 5. The appeal was fixed for hearing on several occasions. It is observed from the record that at the request of the assessee the matter was adjourned on five occasions. On the date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite repeated opportunities. No application seeking adjournment was filed. We,

3 ITA No. 445/Mum/2026 Jalmayur Coop HSG SOC Ltd. therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee and after hearing the learned Departmental Representative (DR). 6. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that since the appeal itself is barred by limitation and no application for condonation of delay has been filed before us, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. We have considered the submissions of the learned DR and perused the material available on record. The Registry has reported a delay of 19 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. Admittedly, no petition seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee. Even after grant of repeated opportunities and adjournments at the request of the assessee, no explanation whatsoever has been placed on record explaining the delay in filing the appeal. In the absence of any application seeking condonation of delay and in the absence of any material demonstrating sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, we are unable to condone the delay. 8. It is a settled proposition of law that an appeal filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation can be entertained only when the appellant demonstrates sufficient cause for the delay and seeks condonation thereof. In the present case, the assessee has neither filed any condonation petition nor furnished any

4 ITA No. 445/Mum/2026 Jalmayur Coop HSG SOC Ltd. explanation for the delay of 19 days in filing the appeal before us. Consequently, the appeal is not maintainable.

Order pronounced on 29/06/2026 as per Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

Sd/- Sd/- (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 29/06/2026 Dhananjay, Sr.PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. संबंधधत आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT धिभागीय प्रधतधनधध, आयकर अपीलीय अधधकरण, मुम्बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy// 1. उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai