Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, M/s Essem Communications (HYD) Private Limited, filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee failed to appear for hearings, failed to sign and verify the appeal memo and subsequent grounds of appeal as required by Rule 47 and Section 253, and filed the appeal with an unexplained delay of over one year from the CIT(A)'s order.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine due to the assessee's repeated non-appearance, non-compliance with procedural requirements (unsigned/unverified appeal memo and grounds of appeal), and the significant, unexplained delay in filing the appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed by the assessee was valid and maintainable given the non-appearance, procedural defects in filing the appeal memo and grounds, and an unexplained delay of over one year in its submission.
Sections Cited
140, 253, Rule 47
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘SM-B‘Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-Shri Manjunatha, G.
(िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/s Essem Vs. ITO Communications (HYD) Ward 17(2) Private Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AABCE1524H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा��रती �ारा/Assessee by: N O N E राज� व �ारा/Revenue by:: Shri Pvitram Kumar J, Sr.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 07/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08/07/2025 आदेश/ORDER
Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated, 27/01/2024 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, for the A.Y.2017-18.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing at 10.30am and accordingly, the matter was passed over to be taken at the end of the board. When
Page 1 of 3 the appeal was called again for hearing at 12.30, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite the fact that, on the earlier occasions, the hearing of the appeal was adjourned at the request of the assessee. Accordingly, the Bench propose to hear and dispose of this appeal ex-parte.
A defect memo was also issued to the assessee by the Registry for removing the defects on account of unsigned and unverified appeal memo in Form 36 as required under Rule 47 r.w.s. 140 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Though the assessee has filed another set of grounds of appeal subsequently, but the same are also not signed and verified as per the rules. Therefore, the appeal has not been made in the manner as prescribed u/s 253 r.w. Rule 47 of I.T. Rules, 1962. The assessee is a Private Limited Company, but there is no proper verification by the Managing Director or the Director of the assessee company. Further, it transpires from the record that the assessee filed the present appeal on 16/02/2025 after a gap of more than one year from the impugned order of the learned CIT (A), dated 27/01/2024 and the assessee has not explained the said gap of more than one year in filing the present appeal. Therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances, the present appeal of the assessee is found to be invalid and liable to be dismissed in limine. We order accordingly.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.