MEHUL ASHOK MULAY ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(3) , MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the appellant assessee did not offer any sufficient cause or make sincere efforts to seek condonation for the significant delay in filing the appeals. Multiple opportunities were given, but no satisfactory explanation was provided.
What were the facts?
Seven appeals were filed against a consolidated order dated 19.06.2023, which dismissed all appeals ex-parte. The appeals were presented to the Tribunal as time-barred, with a delay of approximately 328 days. The appellant assessee failed to provide sufficient cause or file a delay condonation application.
What were the issues?
Dismissal of appeals as time-barred due to lack of sufficient cause for delay and absence of condonation application.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH
Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश / O R D E R
PER BENCH:
1. 1. All above seven appeals have been preferred against the consolidated impugned order dated 19.06.2023 passed by learned CIT(A) wherein, learned CIT(A) has dismissed all the appeals ex-parte.
2. Perused the records and heard learned DR in attendance as none responded for the appellant assessee.
3. It transpires from the perusal of records that all the above referred appeals were presented before the Tribunal as time barred on 11.07.2024 against the consolidated impugned order dated 19.06.2023 by a delay of about 328 days. It is noticed that the appellant assessee has neither stated any sufficient cause in form no. 36 nor filed any delay condonation application with a prayer to condone the said delay. It is further noticed that the appellant assessee has not made any sincere and bonafide efforts to make prayer for the condonation of the said delay despite various opportunities vide orders dated 12.07.2024, 28.08.2024 and 21.10.2024. In absence of any sufficient cause, all the aforestated appeals Sd/- Sd/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 21/10/2024 Anandi Nambi, Steno Copy of the Order forwarded to:
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Crs Builders Private Limited vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
