VISHWASRAO NAIK SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, SANGLI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the appeal was filed significantly beyond the prescribed time limit. In the absence of any valid reason or application explaining the delay, the Tribunal had no option but to dismiss the appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 424 days. The assessee did not provide any explanation or affidavit for the delay. The assessee also remained unrepresented during the hearing.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the substantial delay in filing the appeal and the lack of any reasonable cause or explanation provided by the assessee for this delay.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI
आदेश / ORDER
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :
This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 24-04-2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolhapur [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2013-14.
We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. Thus, the assessee called absent and set ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal by hearing the ld. DR and perusing the material available on record.
At the outset, we find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 424 days and no affidavit or a petition filed explaining the said delay. The ld. DR, Shri Sardar Singh Meena submits that the assessee requires to file an appeal within specified period. The copies of orders passed by the CIT(A) are uploaded to the e-mail of assessee and the assessee must have received the copy of impugned order on 24-04-2017 itself. He prayed to dismiss the appeal in limine. The impugned order was passed by the CIT(A) on 24-04- 2017 and the assessee requires to file an appeal before this Tribunal within 60 days from the date of receipt of said order. On an examination of record, we find the assessee filed memo of appeal by hand on 21-08-2018. After scrutiny the Registry of this Tribunal issued a defective notice dated 27-08-2018 stating that the appeal is barred by time by 424 days and also advised the assessee to rectify the defect within 10 days from the receipt of said notice. We find no compliance was made by the assessee to rectify the said defect by filing an application explaining the reasons for delay by way of an affidavit. Since, there is no explanation to that effect and in the absence of which, we have no option, except to dismiss the appeal in limine. Thus, the appeal is dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 09th September, 2022.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026