Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
Date of Hearing – 12/08/2024 Date of Order – 12/08/2024
O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M.
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 19/02/2021, passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur–2, [“learned PCIT”], for the assessment year 2011–12.
In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–
“The order passed u/s 263 by the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income, is wrong. illegal and opposed to facts of the instant case. 2. The Learned PCIT failed to appreciate the facts of the case and passed orders which are opposed to the facts of the case and is erroneous in law.
Tirupati Coal ITA no.370/Nag./2022
3. The Learned PCIT erred in fact while stating that the Learned Assessing Officer had failed to make necessary inquiry and verification of the documents submitted during the Assessment proceedings in relation to the issues raised by the Learned PCIT.
4. The Learned PCIT failed to understand the fact that the Appellant had satisfactorily submitted all the relevant details, documents and evidences in support of all the issues raised by the Learned PCIT in the 263 order.
The Learned PCIT was wrong in claiming that the Assessment order was erroneous to the extent that it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 6. The Learned PCIT failed to appreciate the abundant documentary evidence available on record which were provided by the Appellant during the Assessment proceedings to substantiate his claims. 7. The Learned PCIT failed to appreciate that the Learned Assessing Officer thoroughly Crutinised and verified the issues raised by the Learned PCIT and thus, the 263 order is only a change of opinion by the Department and does not raise any new or additional claims or issues. 8. The Learned PCIT failed to appreciate the fact that the Appellant had provided the audited copy of Balance sheet, Tax Audit report, computation of income, complete ITR, Bank Account statements, Books of accounts, Ledger copies and books, copy of M/s. Ashtavinayak Enterprises with bills/tax invoices, lorry receipts, other routine weigh bills. weighment slips, octroi slips, stock registers, documents showing material movement to the sale parties namely Jindal Saw Ltd., Nashik, Veergujar Aluminium Industries and other buyers, copy of purchase orders received from the said vendors and copy of the respective ledger account which were thoroughly perused and validated by the Learned Assessing officer after duly enquiring the transactions from the customers/buyers of the Appellant and not by merely looking at the documents submitted. 9. For these and other grounds that may be rendered at the time of hearing it is most humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the AppcHTRUFATTICOAL 263 order passed by the Learned PCIT and thus render justice.”
During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 548 days in filing the present appeal. We find that the assessee has not filed proper Petition along with Affidavit in support of condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. Before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite providing several opportunities to the assessee.
Tirupati Coal ITA no.370/Nag./2022 Consequently, the Bench is of the view that this appeal is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed in limine.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12/08/2024