C.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY,CHENNAI vs. ITO INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 734/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 July 2018AY 2010-112 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 no merit in the assessee's explanation for the delay and did not condone it. As neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, the appeal was not admitted.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 708 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to belated receipt of an order from the CIT and a rejected revision petition under Section 264.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the appeal should be admitted for hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 264,Section 250(6),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY

Pronounced: 31.07.2018

आदेश / O R D E R

Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:-

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-16, Chennai, dated 04.12.2015 in for the assessment year 2010-11 passed U/s. 250(6) r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act.

2.

The appeal was filed by the assessee with a delay of 708 days.

The assessee has submitted an affidavit before us stating that he had approached the Ld.CIT U/s.264 of the Act, however the same was Ld.CIT(A) is nullity in law. It was further submitted that the order of the Ld.CIT was received belatedly and hence the delay in filing the appeal.

3.

At the outset we do not find any merit in the statements averred in the affidavit filed by the assessee. Hence we don’t find it necessary to condone the delay. Moreover neither the assessee nor his representative appeared before us in pursuing the appeal. Hence we hereby reject the appeal of the assessee as it is not admitted. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced on the 31st July, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 264

All 338 judgments and leading authorities on Section 264 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →