Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal was filed by the assessee challenging an order of the CIT(A) which dismissed their appeal against a rectification order. The assessee failed to appear before the Tribunal on multiple hearing dates and did not file any application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to provide any sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as being barred by limitation.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation without an application for condonation of delay can be admitted.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC-Bench” JAIPUR
Before: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM
vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER .
Present appeal came to be presented on 30.04.2025, while challenging order dated 18.03.2024, passed by Learned CIT(A), relating to the assessment year 2017-18 whereby the appeal filed by the assessee, challenging rectification order dated 21.01.2020, came to be dismissed. The Registry raised a deficiency note that the appeal came to be filed 334 days after the prescribed period of limitation.
Pawan Kumar Yadav, Baran. The appeal is not accompanied by an application seeking condonation of delay.
It may be mentioned here that in view of the deficiency note raised by the Registry, the assessee-appellant was required to file an application seeking condonation of delay. In column 11 of Form 36, the assessee admitted the factum of delay in filing of the appeal, and further, pleaded that application seeking condonation of delay was attached to the memorandum of appeal. Surprisingly, no such application seeking condonation of delay is on record or has been subsequently filed.
As noticed above, the appeal came to be presented on 30.04.2025. When the matter was taken up on 12.08.2025, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Notwithstanding absence on behalf of the assessee, in the interest of justice, the matter was adjourned to 27.08.2025.
However, even on 27.08.2025, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, but the appeal was adjourned for today. Even today, despite wait, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee.
Since the appeal has been filed 334 days after prescribed period of limitation and none has appeared before this Appellate Tribunal on 3 dates, or cared to file any application seeking condonation of delay, we hold that Pawan Kumar Yadav, Baran. the assessee has failed to put forth any sufficient cause for the delay in filing of this appeal, what to say of establishing any sufficient casue for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. Result 6. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby dismissed being barred by limitation. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/09/2025.