BODURI SRINIVASA RAO,AMALAPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMALAPURAM
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2017-18, which was filed with a delay of 253 days. No petition for condonation of delay was submitted, and despite multiple adjournments, no one appeared to represent the assessee before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal noted the substantial delay and the assessee's consistent non-representation, concluding that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the case. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine, being barred by limitation and deemed not maintainable.
Key Issues
Whether an appeal filed with a significant delay without a condonation petition and with repeated non-appearance of the assessee can be entertained and maintained by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM “SMC” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER SHRI S. BALAKRISHNAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal centre, Delhi
I.T.A.No.14/VIZ/2025 Boduri Srinivasa Rao
[hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060593287(1) dated 07.02.2024 for the A.Y.2017-18 arising out of order passed under section 144 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 19.03.2022.
At the outset, it is observed from the appeal record that there is a 2. delay of 253 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has not filed any petition seeking for condonation of delay. Further, at the time of hearing of the appeal, none appeared on behalf of the assessee to represent the case. It is also observed from the order sheet of the appeal that the case was adjourned on multiple occasions as there was no representation on behalf of the assessee to represent the case. Even on this day of hearing of the appeal, there is no representation on behalf of the assessee nor made any submissions in support of the contentions made in the grounds of appeal. Considering all the above facts and circumstances of the case, it seems that the assessee is not interested in pursuing his case, otherwise, either he would have appeared before the Tribunal or made submissions in support of his case. Further, the Tribunal cannot appreciate the lackadaisical nature of either the assessee or the revenue. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that since this appeal is barred by limitation, it is a fit case to dismiss
Page. No 2
I.T.A.No.14/VIZ/2025 Boduri Srinivasa Rao
the appeal as not maintainable based on the above facts. It is ordered accordingly and the appeal is dismissed in limine.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed, in limine.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29th October, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (रिीश सूद) (एस बालाकृष्णन) (RAVISH SOOD) (S. BALAKRISHNAN) न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:29.10.2025 Giridhar, Sr.PS आदेश की प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/ The Assessee : Boduri Srinivasa Rao D.No. 3-122, Near Samanas Lock Amalapuram Mandal East Godavari District – 533221 Andhra Pradesh 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 Income Tax office College Road, Konkapalli Road Amalapuram – 533201 Andhra Pradesh 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकरअपीलीयअनर्करण, नवशधखधपटणम /DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 4. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6. गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam
Page. No 3
