Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
आदेश / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the common Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Chennai, in & 58(2009-10)/C.I.T(A)-9 dated 31.03.2017 for the assessment years 2005-06 & 2007-08.
None represented on behalf of the assessee, and Mr.D.Vivahar represented on behalf of the Revenue. and 2175/Chny/2017 :- 2 -:
As the issues raised in both the appeals of assessee are identical, these two appeals are disposed off by this common order.
The appeal in 4. assessee on 11.07.2017. Defect notice dated 04.08.2017 has been sent to the assessee by RPAD intimating the following defects:
(i) Separate appeals filed for each assessment year to be filed (ii) E Challan not attested iii) Respondent Name wrongly filed in cause title. iv) Time Barred by 4 days. Condontion petition to be filed in Affidavit
The above defects was sought to be cured by the assessee. The defect in respect of non-filing of the condonation petition has been cured.
However, the remaining three defects pointed out have not been cured.
4.1 The appeal in has been filed by the assessee on 27.10.2017. Defect notice dated .11.2017 has been sent to the assessee by RPAD intimating the following defects: (i) Appeal fee is short by Rs.9,000/- (ii) Time Barred by 60 days. Condontion petition filed for 5 days. iii) Respondent Name wrongly filed in cause title.
The above defects was sought to be cured by the assessee. However, all the defects pointed out remain uncured.
5. Both the Appeals were posted for hearing on 15.02.2018, 07.5.2018, 11.07.2018, 23.10.2018, 29.01.2019, 02.05.2019, and 06.08.2019. All the said adjournment dates are granted at the request of ld.AR. These two Appeals were posted for hearing today, that is on and 2175/Chny/2017 :- 3 -:
18.09.2019 and none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, the defects pointed out in the Notices remain uncured. 6. Consequently, both the appeals filed by the Assessee stand dismissed for defects uncured by applying the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Prasad Productions P.
Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal [1997] 226 ITR 778 (Mad).
In the result, both the appeals of assessee for the assessment years 2005-06 & 2007-08 are dismissed in liminie on account of defects uncured. Order pronounced in the open Court after conclusion of hearing on the 18th September, 2019 in Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (इंटूर� रामा राव) (जॉज� माथन) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (GEORGE MATHAN) �या�यक सद य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, 4दनांक/Dated: 18th September, 2019. K S Sundaram