Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal was filed by the assessee, Kannammal Educational Trust, against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11. Multiple notices were issued to the assessee, but no one appeared. Service was eventually effected through affixture.
Held
The Tribunal noted a significant delay of 929 days in filing the appeal. The reasons provided for the delay were found to be casual and unsatisfactory, leading to the non-condonation of the delay.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and if not, the appeal is dismissed as time-barred.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, DELHI [in short, “CIT(A)”] dated 01.08.2022, for AY 2010-11.
From the order sheet it is revealed that despite multiple notices issued to the assessee, none present. Finally, notice of hearing was served through affixture on the last known address of the assessee. The revenue has filed the inspector report vide covering letter dated 15.09.2025. Despite service through affixture, none appeared for the assessee. Hence, we are constrained to proceed to hear the appeal.
The Registry has noted a delay of 929 days in the filing of the appeal. Considering the reasons stated in the condonation petition filed by the assessee, and finding the explanation casual, not satisfactory. Hence, the delay is not condoned. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine as time barred.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine.
Order pronounced in open court on 10th November, 2025 in Chennai.