ZYKA MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. ITO-13 (3) (4) , MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
Per: Anikesh Banerjee (JM):
The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the Ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal-3, Bhopal [for brevity ‘the ld. CIT(A)], order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’) for assessment year 2016-17, date of order 06.12.2024. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Ld. Income Tax Officer Ward 13(3)(4) Mumbai
(for brevity the ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 144 of the Act date of order
24.12.2018. 2
Zyka Merchandise P. Ltd.
When the appeal was called for hearing, no one appeared on behalf of assessee to represent his case. There is no application for seeking adjournment either. On perusal of record, we find that the hearings were scheduled on number of dates. But no response from the end of the assessee. The Registry further inform that the appeal is time barred and filed with delay for 97days. In view of the above and considering the nature of dispute, we proceed to dispose the appeal ex-parte qua for the assessee after hearing the Ld. DR and on the basis of material available on the record. 3. We have heard the submissions of the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The Ld. DR submitted that the impugned assessment order was passed ex parte under section 144 of the Act, wherein additions were made on account of share application money pending for allotment amounting to Rs. 8,90,36,000/- and investment in shares of IBD Space Infra Pvt. Ltd. amounting to Rs. 58,00,000/-. It was further pointed out that, during the appellate proceedings, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the additions made by the Ld. AO. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 97 days. The Ld. DR strongly relied upon and supported the orders of the revenue authorities.
Upon verification of the record, we find that no petition seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee. Further, the assessee has failed to explain any sufficient cause for the delay in filing the present appeal. In the absence of any application for condonation of delay and any explanation
3
Zyka Merchandise P. Ltd.
demonstrating sufficient cause, the appeal cannot be admitted for adjudication, as it has been filed beyond the prescribed limitation period by 97 days. Since no justifiable reason has been furnished by the assessee explaining the delay, the same cannot be condoned. Accordingly, in our considered view, the present appeal is time-barred, and in the absence of any application for condonation of delay, the appeal stands rejected as not maintainable.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.4407/Mum/2025 is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11th day of March 2026. (JAGADISH)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai,िदनांक/Dated:
11/03/2026
SAUMYASr.PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
अपीलाथŎ/The Appellant , 2. Ůितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयुƅ CIT 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाडŊफाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER,
////
(Asstt.