RAMU MUSUNURI,RANGAPURAM LINGAPALEM MANDAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ELURU
Facts
The assessee filed an e-appeal on 31.10.2022 against an order served on 22.08.2024, indicating a delay without a condonation application. The appeal was also defective as the assessee failed to annex prescribed documents and did not file the challan for appeal fees, despite being notified and having 10 previous hearing opportunities to rectify.
Held
The Tribunal held that the appeal was defective due to non-compliance with procedural requirements, including the delay in filing without seeking condonation, and the failure to submit necessary documents and appeal fees. Therefore, the appeal was deemed liable for dismissal.
Key Issues
The maintainability of an appeal before the ITAT suffering from procedural defects such as late filing without condonation, non-submission of prescribed documents, and non-payment of appeal fees.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON’BLE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. The present appeal was e-filed by the assessee on 31.10.2022. From the perusal of the record, we find that the Registry of the Tribunal, vide notice dated 06.11.2024, notified certain defects in filing the present appeal. We find that, apart from filing Form No. 36 and the ground of appeal, no other documents/orders, as prescribed under the ITAT Rules, 1963, are annexed with this appeal. Further, from the perusal of the Form No. – 36 filed by the assessee, we find that the date of service of communication of the impugned order is
I.T.A. No. 452/VIZ/2024 Ramu Musunuri 22.08.2024, and the assessee filed the appeal on 31.10.2024. Thus, it appears to have been filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. However, the assessee has not filed any application seeking condonation of the delay. Furthermore, the assessee has also not filed the challan, which evidences the payment of appeal filing fees, before the Tribunal. Therefore, in sum and substance, it is evident that the assessee neither took any steps to cure the defects as notified by the Registry nor filed any application seeking condonation of the apparent delay in filing the present appeal.
From the perusal of the record, we further find that this appeal was listed for hearing on 10 occasions previously; despite this fact, the assessee did not take any steps to cure the aforesaid defects. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the present appeal in the present form is defective and, therefore, is liable to be dismissed. We order accordingly.
In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19th September, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (एस बालाकृष्णन) (संदीप धसंह करहेल) (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) (S. BALAKRISHNAN) न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदस्य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated :19.09.2025 Giridhar, Sr.PS
Page No. 2
I.T.A. No. 452/VIZ/2024 Ramu Musunuri आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/ The Assessee : Ramu Musunuri Rangapuram Lingapalem Mandal West Godavari - 534462 2. रधजस्व / The Revenue : Income Tax Officer 23-B-4-6/4 Income Tax Office KKS Towers, R.R.Pet Eluru – 534002 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax नवभधगीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, नवशधखधपटणम /DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 4. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file 6. //True Copy// आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam
Page No. 3
