BHARAT M. NAGORI,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
ITA 25/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 October 2018AY 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 dismissed the appeal in limine due to the delay in filing. The appeal was not pursued by the assessee, and the defects were not rectified.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order, but it was barred by limitation by 51 days. The assessee did not file a condonation petition for the delay and failed to cure defects in the filing, including an incorrect address.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the assessee is maintainable due to significant delay and non-compliance with procedural requirements.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. S. SYAL, VP & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM

आदेश / ORDER

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM :

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune dated 16.08.2016 for the assessment year 2007-08 confirming levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2.

This appeal by the assessee is barred by limitation. A perusal of the defect notice available on record shows that there is delay of 51 days in filing of the appeal. The assessee has not filed any petition seeking condonation of delay. Further, there is deficiency in payment of prescribed fee along with the filing of the appeal. A perusal of the case file shows that the defect notified to the assessee has not been cured. The notice of the

2 ITA No.25/PUN/2017

appeal along with defect memo was issued to the assessee through RPAD on 26.09.2018. The notice has been returned back unserved with postal remarks “Left address”. The assessee has not bothered to file revised Form No.36 intimating his current address. All these facts indicate that the assessee is not keen to pursue his appeal.

3.

In absence of any petition seeking condonation of delay, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine being barred by limitation. Without commenting on the merits, the appeal of assessee is dismissed on the ground of limitation.

4.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on Thursday, the 25th day of October, 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (R. S. SYAL) (VIKAS AWASTHY) VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; �दनांक/ Dated : 25th October, 2018 Sujeet आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant. 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent. 2. आयकर आयु�त (अपील) / The CIT(A)-11, Pune; 3. 4. The DGIT (Inv.), Pune; �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “बी” ब�च, 5. पुणे/ DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल/ Guard File. 6. //स�या�पत ��त// True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, //True Copy//

Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, पुणे/ ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →