ASA DIAMOND JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, 12(1)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3602/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain (Judicial Member), Shri Prabhash Shankar ( (Accountant Member)4 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 noted the repeated non-appearances and substantial delay in filing the appeal. It found the reasons provided for the delay insufficient and lacking proper substantiation, leading to the dismissal of the condonation application.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an order, but failed to appear before the tribunal on multiple occasions and filed the appeal with a significant delay. The assessee sought condonation of delay, citing a director's illness, but did not provide specific details or supporting documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned based on the provided reasons and evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “A” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Shri Sandeep Gosain (JM) & Shri Prabhash Shankar (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Rai
Pronounced: 11/06/2025

O R D E R Per Sandeep Gosain (JM) :-

At the very outset, we noticed that none appeared when the case was called repeatedly. Even no application for seeking adjournment has been filed by the assessee. Which shows that assessee is not interested in pursuing the present appeal. On going through the case file we also noticed that today is the 11th opportunity and there is no justification for further adjournment. We also notice that there is delay of 249 days in filing the present appeal and moreover assessee was also ex parte before CIT (appeals) as well. Even otherwise Ld. DR present in the court is ready with the arguments. Therefore we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte.

2.

Assessee had moved an application for seeking condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. On going through the contents of the said application, we noticed that assessee is a private limited company and it has been mentioned in the application that one of the Director of the company was not keeping well and was suffering from ailment, therefore the appeal which was to be filed till 31.10.23 could not be filed within the prescribed

2 ASA Diamond Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. period. But in the entire application, no specific details have been mentioned by the assessee more particularly the date of knowledge and other important details. The assessee has not placed on record any document in order to show that the said Director of the company was ever admitted as indoor patient in any of the Hospitals. From the contents of the application, the assessee himself has admitted that the said Director of the assessee recovered from the illness in the month of August, 2023. However, still the appeal could not be filed within limitation.

3.

The assessee has only taken a general plea to explain the reasons for delay. However, the said reasons mentioned in the application are not considered as ‘sufficient cause’ in condoning the delay. On going through the entire file we also noticed that no supporting affidavit has been filed by the assessee and moreover, the assessee was also ex parte before Ld. CIT(A) as well, which goes to show the ‘ casual and cavalier’ approach of the assessee in pursuing the Income Tax proceedings. Therefore keeping in view the contents of the application and the discussion made by us, we are of the view that there is no sufficient cause for condoning the delay. Therefore, application for seeking condonation of delay filed by the assessee stands dismissed.

4.

Since we have dismissed the application for seeking condition of delay filed by the assessee. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee also stands, dismissed in view of our above decision.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 11/06/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →