MAHESH PRASAD MEENA,HOSHANGABAD vs. THE PCIT-1, , BHOPAL

None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing. It transpires from the record that the assessee has been seeking adjournment after filing this appeal. Earlier one Shri Apurva Mehta, CA was appearing on behalf of the ITANo.174/Ind/2022 Mahesh Prasad Meena assesse but after taking repeated adjournments he has submitted a letter dated 25th May 2023 to seek permission to withdraw the power of attorney due to non-cooperation of the assessee. The Bench then adjourned the hearing of the case on 12.06.2023 and directed for notice to assessee through RPAD as well as E-mail. Last opportunity was granted to the assessee to argue the appeal. Thereafter repeated notices were issued to the assessee but there is no response to the notices issued by the Tribunal despite final opportunity. Accordingly the bench was left with no option but to hear and disposed off this appeal ex-parte.

There is a delay of 763 days in filing the present appeal the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for condonation of delay. The assessee has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Suo Motu Cognizance for extension of Limitation reported in 441 ITR 722 (SC). and submitted that the impugned order was passed on 06.03.2020 and before the assesse could file the appeal there was a lockdown throughout the country due to Covid-19 pandemic and therefore, the assessee has filed the appeal just after the period allowed by the Supreme Court.

Ld. DR has objected to the condition of the delay and submitted that there is a further delay in filing the present appeal even after time granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the assessee has not explained any reasons for the delay in filing the appeal after 30th May 2022.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.