M/S JAISU SHIPPING COMPANY PRIVATE LTD.,ADIPUR-KUTCH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMR. INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 285/RJT/2015Status: HeardITAT Rajkot31 May 2023AY 2010-11Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the substantial delay in filing the appeals and the absence of any explanation or condonation petition from the assessees. Consequently, the Tribunal found the appeals to be not maintainable in law.

What were the facts?

The assessees filed appeals with a significant delay of 106 days. No petition or affidavit was filed to condone this delay, and no representative appeared on behalf of the assessees. The revenue representative argued that the assessment orders were ex-parte and the lower appellate authority had dismissed the appeals due to non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether appeals filed with a significant delay and without a condonation petition are maintainable before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA Nos. 285/Rjt/2015
ITA Nos. 286/Rjt/2015

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

1.

These two appeals are filed by two different Assessees by two Appellate orders both dated 11.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Rajkot, arising out of the assessment orders passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the respective Assessment Year (A.Y) 2010-11

2.

The registry has noted that there is a delay of 106 days in filing the above appeal by the assessee. However the assessee has not filed any Affidavit or Petition to Condone the Delay. It is further seen that no authorization is given by the assessee to any Counsel to represent the above appeals. In spite of service of notice through department by way “Affixture” on 18.05.2023, None appeared on behalf of the assessee. This clearly shows that the assessees are not interested in pursuing the above appeals.

3.

The Ld. CIT-DR, Shri Shramdeep Sinha appearing for the Revenue submitted that the assessment orders are exparte orders passed u/s. 144 of the Act by the Assessing Officers after giving ample opportunities to the assessee. Even before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee not appeared in spite of 10 opportunities given to them. Therefore in the absence of any details filed by the assessees in support of its grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals filed by the above assessees. Now before the Tribunal there is a delay of 106 days but no explanation offered by the assessee, therefore the same is liable to be dismissed.

4.

We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. We do not find any Affidavit or Petition to Condone the Delay of 106 days in filing the above appeals by the assessee. Thus prima facie the appeals are not maintainable in law. In the absence of any explanation for the delay of 106 days in filing the above appeals by way Affidavit and Condonation Petition, we have no other option than to dismiss the above appeals in limine.

5.

In the result, the appeals filed by the above Assessees are dismissed as not maintainable.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →