Loading judgment…
Facts
Three appeals were filed by the assessee against orders of the Ld. CIT(A). However, the assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the appeal memo (Form No.36) was found to be unsigned.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessee failed to rectify the defects in the appeal memo despite notice. Therefore, the appeals were considered defective and not maintainable.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals are maintainable when the appeal memo is unsigned and defects are not rectified by the assessee.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ SM ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Shri Ravish SoodShri Madhusudan Sawdia
to 1361 of 2025 Yasmeen Shazia Ramadugu आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ SM ‘ Bench, Hyderabad �ी रिवश सूद,�ाियक सद� एवं �ी मधुसूदन साविड़या लेखा सद� सम� | Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.1359, 1360 & 1361/Hyd/2025 (िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2022-23 & 2021-22) Yasmeen Shazia Vs. Dy. CIT Karimnagar Central Circle 1(4) PAN:IYEPS9134K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा��रती �ारा/Assessee by: N O N E राज� व �ारा/Revenue by:: Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 30/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 30/10/2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Bench:
All these 3 appeals are filed by Yasmeen Shazia (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. CIT(A)”) for the A.Ys. 2020-21, 2022-23 and 2021-22 respectively. 2. The brief facts of the case are that all these three appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A). However, when the matters were called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee.
Page 1 of 2 to 1361 of 2025 Yasmeen Shazia Ramadugu Further, no adjournment petition was filed by the assessee seeking postponement of the hearing. On perusal of the records, it is observed that in all these three appeals, the Form No.36, i.e., the appeal memo, was found to be unsigned. The defects were accordingly communicated to the assessee by the Registry through defect notice dated 09.09.2025, requiring the assessee to rectify the same within ten (10) days from the date of receipt of the notice. However, till the date of hearing, the assessee has not removed the said defects. It is therefore evident that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeals. Since the Form No.36 in all these appeals remains unsigned and the defects have not been cured within the prescribed time even after due intimation by the Registry, the appeals are defective in nature and not maintainable in their present form. Accordingly, all these three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as defective and are liable to be dismissed in limine.