Loading judgment…
Facts
Seven appeals were filed against a consolidated impugned order that dismissed all appeals ex-parte. The appeals were presented as time-barred with a significant delay of approximately 328 days. The appellant assessee did not provide any sufficient cause or file a delay condonation application.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the appellant had not made sincere efforts to seek condonation for the delay. In the absence of any sufficient cause or bonafide efforts for condonation, the appeals were considered time-barred.
Key Issues
Dismissal of appeals as time-barred due to lack of sufficient cause for delay and absence of condonation application.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH
Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
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: