M/S. ESSEM COMMUNICATIONS (HYD) PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-17(2), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 236/HYD/2025Status: FixedITAT Hyderabad08 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

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.

What were the 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.

What were the 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.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 140,Section 253

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.

Hearing: 07/07/2025

(ि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

1.

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.

2.

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.

3.

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.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 140

All 100 judgments and leading authorities on Section 140 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →