KUSHAL MANOJ AGGRAWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. COMMISSIONER INCOME OF TAX APPEAL-12,AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 264/AHD/2021Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 January 2024AY 2012-2013Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), Ms. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted the assessee's lackadaisical approach and lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the tribunal found no reason to admit the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. The assessee failed to file an application for condonation of delay and also did not appear before the tribunal for multiple hearings.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be admitted despite being barred by limitation and the assessee's failure to provide a valid reason for the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Appellant: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. DR

The instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 31.03.2021 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad (in short ‘CIT(A)’) arising out of the (Kushal Manoj Aggrawal vs. CIT(A)) A.Y.– 2012-13 - 2 - order dated 19.12.2019 passed by the ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

At the time of hearing of the matter, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. It appears from the records that the appeal is barred by limitation for 143 days. No application for condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee, which has been first confirmed by us upon going through the entire records before us. Neither any application for condonation of delay nor any affidavit to that effect is found to have been filed by the assessee. It is pertinent to mention that records reveal that the matter is being taken up by the Bench from 14th July, 2023 and thereafter whenever the matter was taken up in spite of service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee to represent the case before us. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the matter, we find that the assessee is not interested to proceed with the matter. Even an application for condonation of delay has been filed on their behalf to take an opportunity to get the appeal admitted upon condonation of delay in preferring the appeal before us. Thus, having regard to the conduct and lackadaisical approach of the assessee in the absence (Kushal Manoj Aggrawal vs. CIT(A)) A.Y.– 2012-13 - 3 - of any application for condonation of delay filed by the assessee, we do not find any reason to admit the appeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed.

3.

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed.

This Order pronounced on 29/01/2024

Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 29/01/2024 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →