What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the appeal was time-barred and the defects were not rectified despite multiple opportunities. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on technical grounds.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT which was found to be time-barred by 7 days. A defect memo was issued, but it was not complied with by the assessee.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal due to it being time-barred and the non-compliance with the defect memo.

Shri Rajesh Kr. Kushwaha, Barakar vs I.T.O, Ward-1(1), Asansol | ITAT Kolkata 2015

Date of hearing: 09.12.2015 Date of pronouncement: 09.12.2015 For the Appellant: Miss Varsha Jalan, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT, Sr. DR This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A), Asansol in Appeal No.168/CIT(A)/Asl/W-1(1)/Asl/08-09 dated 30.05.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward- 1(1), Asansol u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for AY 2006-07 vide its order dated 24.12.2008.

At the outset, it is noticed that this appeal is time barred by 7 days and a defect memo was issued but not complied with. The assessee has not filed condonation petition along with this appeal and the appeal was taken up for hearing on many occasions but no defect was removed. Hence, the appeal being defect is hereby dismissed.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed.

4. Order is pronounced in the open court. Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) Judicial Member Dated : 9th December, 2015 Jd. Sr. P.S Copy of the order forwarded to: APPELLANT – Shri Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha, Hanuman Charai, G. T. Road, 1. Barakar, Pin-713324. Respondent – ITO, Ward-1(1), Asansol. 2 The CIT(A), Asansol 3.

SHRI RAJESH KR. KUSHWAHA,BARAKAR vs. I.T.O, WARD-1(1), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments