NEYVELI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PANRUTI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-2, CHENNAI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE & SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANJUNATHA.G, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 23.08.2022, and pertains to
assessment year 2018-19.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust filed its
return of income for AY 2017-18 on 30.03.2018 admitting ‘NIL’ total income
ITA No.925/Chny/2023 :: 2 ::
after claiming exemption u/s.11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the
Act"). The assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on
18.03.2021 by making addition of Rs.17,67,500/- by rejecting exemption
claimed u/s.11(1A) of the Act. The assessee carried the matter in appeal
before the First Appellate Authority, but could not succeed. The Ld.CIT(A)
for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 23.08.2022, dismissed
the appeal and upheld additions made towards income. Aggrieved by the
order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
None appeared for the assessee. We have heard the Ld.DR, perused
the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities
below. We find that the appeal filed by the assessee is defective on two
counts. The first defective is delay in filing of the appeal. The Registry has
noticed 307 days delay in filing of the appeal. The assessee neither filed
any petition for condonation of delay nor explained the reasons. The
second defective is incorrect particulars in Form No.36 filed by the
assessee. On one hand, it was stated that the appellant is Shri S.
Rajendran, on the other hand, it was stated that the appellant is Neyveli
Educational Trust. We cannot make out who is assessee in the present
appeal, whether it is Shri S.Rajendran individual or Neyveli Educational
Trust. Further, Form No.36 filed by the assessee is defective, because,
there is no verification as required under the law as specified in Form No.36
itself. From the above, it is abundantly clear that the appeal filed by the
ITA No.925/Chny/2023 :: 3 :: assessee is defective which cannot be admitted, and thus, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as unadmitted for defects.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as unadmitted for defects.
Order pronounced on the 25th day of January, 2024, in Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (महावीर िसंह) (मंजूनाथा.जी) (MANJUNATHA.G) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा�� /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 25th January, 2024. TLN आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ� / Appellant 3. आयकर आयु� / CIT 5. गाड� फाईल / GF 2. ��यथ� / Respondent 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध / DR
