NAUSHAD M. MALLICK,MUMBAI vs. ITO 3(1), MUMBAI

ITA 539/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 November 2019AY 2007-082 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 found that the assessee's submissions for condonation of delay were not convincing due to lack of supporting evidence. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 24 days. The assessee sought condonation of delay but did not provide supporting documents or an affidavit.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned based on the submissions made by the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik- Ld. DR

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik- Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 27/11/2019 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 27/11/2019 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2007-08 contest confirmation of certain additions by Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane.

When the appeal was called for hearing, none appeared for the assessee and therefore, the matter was proceeded with ex-parte qua the assessee.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →