SHRI K K MAHESH,DAVANGERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, DAVANGERE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3296/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 February 2021AY 2009-102 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 Tribunal held that the appeals could not be admitted due to the delay and unrectified defects. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c). The appeals were barred by limitation and had unrectified defects. No one appeared on behalf of the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals filed by the assessee should be admitted given the delay and unrectified defects.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI B. R. BASKARAN & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, D.R
Hearing: 19.02.2021Pronounced: 24.02.2021

PER BENCH:

1.

Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by Ld. CIT(A), Davanagere for the assessment years 2009-10 & 2012-13, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed a penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short].

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We notice that these appeals were filed by the assessee in December, 2018 and since then the authorized representative of the assessee named Shri Shreehari Kutsa has been seeking adjournment from time to time. We also notice that both the appeals are barred by limitation by 6 & 3297/Bang/2018 Shri K.K. Mahesh, Davanagere

Page 2 of 2 days and 8 days respectively. We notice that the assessee has not filed any petition requesting the bench to condone the delay. Besides the above, one more defect pointed out by the registry has not been rectified till date. The A.R. of the assessee appeared before the bench on 18.2.2021 and he was directed to rectify the defects and accordingly the case was posted for hearing on 19.02.2021. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee on the above said date and the defects have also not been rectified.

3.

Under these set of facts, we are of the view that both these appeals could not be admitted. Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed in limine.

4.

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →