Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 304 days. The assessee claimed that they were unaware of the order due to not receiving email or SMS notifications and subsequently discovered the order on the ITBA portal. However, the assessee failed to appear on the hearing date and provide sufficient reasons for the delay.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessee failed to demonstrate why they did not regularly check their ITBA portal and on what date they actually saw the impugned order. In the absence of sufficient cause and any supportive material for the delay, the application for condonation of delay was rejected.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and if the grounds of appeal are valid.
Sections Cited
68, 10(38), 69C, 234A, 234B, 234C, 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA
Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri. Prashant Barate, Sr-DR Date of Hearing 20.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement 28.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA:-
The present appeal of Aasha Hemant Ranaawat Vs ITO Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai was posted for hearing on 20th June, 2024. The assessee filed an appeal with following grounds of appeal. (i) The CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,26,11,298/- made by the AO to the income of the appellant u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act representing the sale proceeds of shares M/s.Aasha Hemant Ranawat by the rejecting the claim of assessee in respect of the exemption claimed u/s 10(38) of the Income Tax Act.
(ii) The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the view of AO relating to making an addition of Rs. 8,68,452/- to the income of the appellant u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act towards the commission expenses.
(iii) The learned CIT(A) erred in not passing any speaking order relating to levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act.
(iv) The learned CIT(A) erred in not passing any speaking order relating to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
(v) The appellant has contended that she was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause to filethe appeal with same delay and requested to Hon’ble Tribunal to condone the delay.
On 20th June, 2024, on the date of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee,nor there is any letter of adjournment on behalf of the assessee. Hence, we are constrained to decide the appeal ex-parte. At the outset, we observe that there is a delay of 304 days in the filing instant appeal. The assessee,filed an application dated 28.03.2024 along with supportive affidavit. He M/s.Aasha Hemant Ranawat has claimed that the impugned order was passed on 30.03.2023 and uploaded on ITBA portal on the very same day. However, no such information/intimation was received on E-mail of the assessee or SMS and such the assessee was not aware of the impugned order. Therefore, an appeal was not filed within prescribed time. It was claimed that the assessee logged in ITBA Portal and came to know above impugned order dismissing appeal and therefore downloaded the appellate order and filed an appeal before the ITAT now. We have considered the submission of assessee for not receiving the information/intimation qua passing the order either by E-mail/SMS. The Assessee failed to demonstrate, as to why he has not checked his ITBA portal regularly and on which date in fact, he has seen the impugned order on ITBA portal. Before us, the Assessee despite sending the notice of hearing on 20-06-2024, failed to appear and demonstrate the sufficient reason for delay occurred in filing of this appeal. Simply by filling an application with blad allegations without any supportive material, the delay cannot be condoned. Hence considering peculiar facts and circumstances in totally and in the absence of sufficient cause, we are inclined not to condone the delay, hence the application for condonation of delay is rejected. Consequently, the appeal under consideration is dismissed in limine, however with liberty to the assessee to seek recall of this order by demonstrating sufficient reason for non-prosecution of caseas well as substantiating the reason for delay. M/s.Aasha Hemant Ranawat
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed “in limine, with liberty as granted”
Order Pronounced in Open Court on 28.06.2024