DHARMADEVI K JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

The only grievance of the Assessee is that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in refusing to condone the delay in filing appeal and thereby confirming the ex-

2 Smt Dharmidevi K Jain Act by the Assessing Officer making addition of Rs.35,92,500/- u/s 68 of the Act.

Inspite of several notices issued to the Assessee none appeared nor any adjournment is moved. Registry issued several notices to the Assessee by registered post acknowledgement due and the notices returned unserved with the endorsement ‘ID’ and ‘Left’. Since several opportunities were given to the Assessee and Assessee did not appear, we dispose of this appeal on hearing the Ld. DR.

The Ld. DR at the outset submitted that the appeal is time barred by 23 days and the Assessee filed petition for condonation of delay giving reasons for delay of 23 days stating that the advocate and chartered accountant who were entrusted to look into the income tax matters for filing appeals failed to file appeals before the Ld. CIT (Appeals) as well as this Tribunal in time. In the petition, it is also submitted that the Assessee was busy in attending to her mother-in-law who was sick and therefore, there was a delay in filing appeal to the Tribunal. The Ld. DR submits that no proof has been adduced for the statement given by the Assessee that the delay has occurred due to lapse on the part of the tax consultants and there was no proof adduced to say that the Assessee was attending to her mother-in-law due to her sickness. Therefore, he objected for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.

Inspite of several notices, the Assessee could not appear before this Tribunal and no proper explanation was given for the delay in filing the appeal

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed in limine.