M/S.SUPER TECH INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4814/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 January 2020AY 2011-123 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 since no application for condonation of delay was filed explaining sufficient cause, the appeal could not be admitted. The non-appearance further suggested a lack of interest from the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT beyond the prescribed 60-day period without any application for condonation of delay. The assessee also did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT can admit an appeal filed beyond the prescribed limitation period without a condonation application. Whether non-appearance and lack of explanation for delay indicate lack of interest in pursuing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI ‘G’ BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON’BLE&

order

: January 9, 2020 ORDER

PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JM

1.

The instant appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.03.2018 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) – 29 Mumbai u/s 144 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the order dated 19.02.2016 passed by the ITO-19(3)(4), Mumbai for A.Y. 2011-12.

2.

The addition u/s 69C to the tune of Rs. 13,13,196/- has been challenged before us.

3.

At the time of hearing of the instant appeal none appeared on behalf of the assessee, neither any adjournment has been sought for. However, upon perusal of the records, it is found that the order impugned dated 16.03.2018 was received by the assessee on 10.04.2018 but the appeal had been filed before the registry on Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Super Tech Industries 10.08.2018. Thus the appeal had been admittedly filed beyond the period of 60 days prescribed under the statute. Further that no application for condonation of such delay has been preferred by the assessee before us. Section 253(5) empowers the Appellate Tribunal to admit an appeal even after the expiry of the relevant period referred to in sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) if it is satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not presenting the same within the period. Since no application for condonation of such delay explaining the sufficient cause for not presenting the same before Tribunal, we are unable to admit the instant appeal. Further that from the fact of non appearance even at the call, on behalf of the assessee it can be presumed that the assessee is not interested to proceed with the matter. Records further reveals that the matter was earlier adjourned twice since none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, in the absence of the application for condonation of delay filed by the assessee explaining the sufficient reason for such delay, we are unable to proceed with the matter since it is barred by limitation. Hence the appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →