Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for A.Y. 2017-18, but there was a significant delay of 276 days in its filing. Despite numerous notices and an adjournment, the assessee failed to appear for the appeal hearings before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal ex-parte, finding it not maintainable as the assessee neither filed an application for condonation of delay nor provided any reasonable cause for the 276-day delay. Consequently, the appeal was held to be barred by limitation.
Key Issues
The primary legal issue was the maintainability of an appeal filed with an inordinate delay of 276 days, for which no condonation application was filed and no reasonable cause was provided by the assessee.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam “Division” Bench, Visakhapatnam
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-Shri S. Balakrishnan
(िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Srinivasa Rao Saripudi Vs. Income Tax Officer Vijayawada Ward-2 (4) PAN:APVPS1663K Vijayawada (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा��रती �ारा/Assessee by: N O N E राज� व �ारा/Revenue by:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 08/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08/09/2025 आदेश/ORDER
Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17/04/2025 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, relating to A.Y.2017-18.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing despite various notices issued to the assessee and adjournment of hearing was granted on the request of the assessee, vide order dated 21/07/2025. Even after taking adjournment of hearing on 21/07/2025, the assessee did not bother to appear before the Tribunal on the subsequent dates. Accordingly, the Bench proposes to hear and dispose of this matter, ex-parte.
ITA 200 of 2025 Srinivasa Rao Saripudi 3. There is a delay of 276 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has neither filed any application for condonation of delay, nor explained the cause of such delay of 276 days in filing the present appeal. The learned DR has vehemently contended that the appeal of the assessee is not maintainable as there is an inordinate delay of 276 days and the assessee has failed to explain any reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. It is pertinent to note that despite several opportunities and notices issued by this Tribunal, the assessee has failed to explain the delay of 276 days in filing the present appeal. Thus, in the absence of the explanation of any reasonable cause of such a delay in filing the appeal, the appeal of the assessee is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed being not maintainable as barred by limitation.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.