MUNI REDDY SANTHOSH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX WARD NO. 1(1)(1), BANGALORE

ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT 1. is filed by Shri Muni Reddy Santosh Reddy (the Assessee/Appellant) for Assessment Year 2017-18 against the Appellate Order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (the Ld. CIT(A)) dated 30.10.2023 wherein the Appeal filed by the Assessee against the Assessment Order dated 14.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (2) (3), Bangalore was dismissed. The Assessee is aggrieved and is in appeal before us.

& 507/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 4 2. The Appeal is time barred by 423 days. The Appellate Order was stated to be received by the Assessee on 30.10.2023. However, the impugned appeal is filed on 26.02.2025 thereby causing a delay of 423 days. Assessee has filed a condonation of delay petition wherein it is stated that due to unforeseen circumstances, health issues, lack of necessary documents or any other valid reasons the Assessee was unable to file the Appeal in the prescribed time limit. Therefore, he stated that the delay may be condoned.

Assessee against the Appellate Order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi wherein the appeal filed by the Assessee against the rectification passed u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 11.10.2017 by the Income Tax Officer for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was dismissed. This Appeal is filed late by 161 days. The Appellate Order was received by the Assessee on 22.07.2024 and against which the Appeal was filed on 10.03.2025 for the condonation of the delay. The Assessee has filed an affidavit dated 14.05.2025 stating that there was a change in the Authorized Representative, ill health and challenges in procuring certified copies. Therefore, the Assessee requested for condonation of the delay of 161 days. The Ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee for the reason of non-prosecution. The Ld. CIT(A) has granted 7 opportunities of hearing but none of them were attended to by the Assessee and therefore same was dismissed. Even before us, 6 opportunities were granted. But the Assessee has not submitted anything other on condonation of the delay except stated above or on the merits of the case. The notice of hearing were issued at the E-mail address stated in form no. 36 filed before us. As in the connected appeals Shri Vivek Gupta, CA was appearing, he was also made aware of the various dates. As the Assessee has failed to provide any sufficient cause for delay in filing of the appeal and even affidavit submitted is also not proper and one liner statement. We are constrained to not to condone the delay of 161 days. In view of the above facts, as Assessee has failed to show any sufficient cause, the Appeal is not admitted and dismissed.

& 507/Bang/2025 Page 4 of 4 8. Accordingly, both the appeals of the Assessee are dismissed as no sufficient cause for delay in filing of the Appeal was shown before us despite adequate opportunities. Liberty is granted to assessee, in timelines, if according to rule 24 of ITAT Rules, assessee shows reason of his non appearance to plead about sufficient cause in delay in filing of appeals and then on merits.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16th December 2025.