M.SHANMUGAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1832/CHNY/2015Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 September 2016AY 2007-20083 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine due to the unexplained delay and non-compliance with the defect memo. However, the assessee was granted liberty to file a recall petition with sufficient cause.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a significant delay of 498 days, and the reasons for this delay were not properly explained. Furthermore, the assessee failed to comply with a defect memo issued by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to unexplained delay and non-compliance with procedural requirements. Whether the assessee's failure to prosecute the appeal warrants dismissal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri. R. Durai Pandian, IRS, JCIT

आदेश / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai in ITA No.146/553/14-15, dated 24.2.2014 for the assessment year 2007-

ITA No.1832/Mds/2015 :- 2 -:

2008 passed u/s.143(3) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared and we found that there is a delay of 498 days in filing the appeal and the reasons for delay was not properly explained in the condonation petition and further defect memo was issued on 14.10.2015 for submission of copy of assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act and Form 35 with statement of facts, grounds of appeal

before ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Till today, there is no compliance to defective notice issued by the Tribunal. Since the appeal is defective and could not be adjudicated. In these circumstances, as held by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Limited

38. ITD 320 that there may be various reasons for the assessee to remain absent at the time of hearing and one of the reasons might be absence to prosecute the appeal and also following decision of the Co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited vs ITO in dated 05.07.2011, we hereby dismiss the appeal in limine. However, we make it clear that the assessee is at liberty to file a petition to recall this order provided convincing/sufficient cause be explained with ITA No.1832/Mds/2015 :- 3 -: rectification of defects as per defective notice issued and also for non appearance on the said date of hearing.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA 3. No.1832/Mds/2015 is dismissed Order pronounced on Friday, the 30th day of September, 2016, at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →