What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the inordinate delay in filing the appeals could not be condoned. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed at the outset without considering their merits.

The assessee filed appeals with significant delays of approximately 709 and 699 days for Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The authorized representative was unable to provide valid reasons for this delay.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeals by the assessee was justifiable and could be condoned by the Tribunal.

Nikhil Constructions, V… vs ITO | ITAT Visakhapatnam 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam – FCA

For Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR

Hearing: 01/02/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 173 & 174/VIZ/2018 (Asst. Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12) M/s. Nikhil Constructions, vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), D.No. 54-12-42, Visakhapatnam. Sai Mohan Arcade, Bhanu Nagar, Visakhapatnam. PAN No. AAGFN 7160 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri C. Subrahmanyam – FCA. Department By : Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR Date of hearing : 01/02/2019. Date of pronouncement : 06/02/2019. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Visakhapatnam, both dated 31/03/2016 for the Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2. There is a delay of near about 709 & 699 days in filing both the appeals respectively for the Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12. Ld. Authorised Representative has requested the Bench

2 ITA No.173 & 174/VIZ/2018 (M/s. Nikhil Constructions)

to dispose of the appeals in accordance with law as he is unable to explain the reasons for delay. 3. We find that ld. AR is unable to explain the reasons of inordinate delay in filing the appeals. Therefore, these are not fit cases to condone the delay, hence, we dismiss the same in limini. 4. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed in limini. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 06th day of Feb., 2019.

Sd/- sd/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 06th Feb., 2019. vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee – M/s. Nikhil Constructions, D.No. 54-12- 42, Sai Mohan Arcade, Bhanu Nagar, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Revenue – ITO, Ward-3(2), Visakhapatnam. 3. The Pr.CIT-1, Visakhapatnam. 4. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. 5. Guard file. By order

(VUKKEM RAMBABU) Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.

NIKHIL CONSTRUCTIONS,V ISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments