M/s Apex Builders, Ludhiana V. ITO, W-2(1), Ludhiana

ITA 1284/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1333 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC CHANDIGARH !', # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM ITA NO. 1284/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S APEX BUILDERS, 620, AMBEY BUILDERS, LAKKAR BAZAR, LUDHIANA. VS THE ITO, WARD 2(1), LUDHIANA. PAN NO: AAOFA5873B APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : NONE #!' REVENUE BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, CIT-DR $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 02.09.2019 '()*! & D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.09.2019 $%/ ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 30.01.20 18 OF CIT(A)-I, LUDHIANA PERTAINING TO 2012-13 ASSESSMENT YEAR IS ASSAILED. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRES ENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER . IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESEN TED. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT AT THE TIME OF FIL ING OF THE APPEAL ITSELF I.E. 09.10.2018, THE REGISTRY HAS POI NTED OUT THE FOLLOWING DEFECTS TO THE ASSESSEE : 04.01.2019 1. APPEAL IS TIME-BARRED BY 186 DAYS. 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A) NOT FILED. 3. ONE ORIGINAL/CERTIFIED COPY OF ORIGINAL ORD ER OF CIT(A)NOT FILED. ITA 1284/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CONDONATION OF DELAY APPLICATION PRESUMABLY ALONGWITH THE APPEAL AS IT IS DATED PRIOR TO THE DA TE OF FILING OF THE APPEAL. FOR READY REFERENCE, IT IS EXTRACTE D HEREUNDER: THE HON'BLE BENCH 14/09/2018 ITAT CHANDIGARH. SUB : REQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILI NG OF APPEAL IN CASE OF M/S APEX BUILDERS, LUDHIANA A.Y. 2012-13. THE APPEAL TO THE HON'BLE BENCH IS BEING FILED IN THE SUBJECT CASE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) LUDHIANA DATED 30.01.2018. THE REASON FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IS THAT THERE IS DISPUTE GOING ON BETWEEN PRESENT P ARTNERS AND OUT OF THE PRESENT 4 PARTNERS. MR. OM PARKASH SINGLA AND MRS. SUMAN LAT A WILL BE LEAVING THE FIRM FROM A DATE AS DECIDED BETWEEN ALL THE PARTNERS. THE FORMALITIES OF THE SAME ARE UNDER PROCESS. THE HON'BLE BENCH IS THEREFORE REQUESTED TO CONDON E THE DELAY AND DECIDE THE CASE ON MERITS. SD/- FOR APEX BUILDERS PARTNER 3.1. ON A PERUSAL OF THE SAME, IT IS SEEN THAT THE SAID APPLICATION, IT IS EVIDENT IS A VERY CASUALLY WORDE D APPLICATION WITHOUT CARING TO EVEN REFER TO WHICH DISPUTE SINCE WHEN THAT TOO IF AT ALL. THE CLAIM AS NOTICED IS NOT UNSUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, WHICH MAY FURTHER REQUIRE FILI NG OF AFFIDAVIT OF THE APPELLANT ETC. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT REQUIRED TO ADDRESS A MINOR DELAY O F A WEEK OR SO BUT DELAY OF 187 DAYS. A PERUSAL OF THE APPLICATION SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CARED TO FILE A PROPER CONDONA TION OF DELAY APPLICATION AS RELEVANT FACTS, DATES, EVIDENCES HAV E NOT BEEN REFERRED TO NOR PROVIDED. THE BALD APPLICATION AS EXTRACTED ITA 1284/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 PAGE 3 OF 3 HEREIN ABOVE CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS A BONAFIDE EXPLA NATION MERITING CONDONATION OF DELAY. . IT IS FURTHER SEE N THAT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO COMMUNICATE THOSE SHORTCOMINGS AND THE DEFICIENCIES TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE NOTICE SENT BY REGISTRAR ON THE ONLY ADDRESS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE ITAT HAS COME BACK WI TH THE COMMENT LEFT. ACCORDINGLY, THERE IS NO WAY IN WH ICH THESE DEFICIENCIES ETC. IN THE APPLICATION FILED CAN BE C OMMUNICATED TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE IS DISMISSED AS BEING DEFECTIVE AND BARRED BY LIMITATION. SAID O RDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADDRESS THA T IN THE EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE UNDERTAKES TO FILE A PROPE R CONDONATION OF DELAY APPLICATION ALONGWITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCES AND UNDERTAKES TO ADDRESS THE DEFECTS ETC. THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO MOVE AN APPLICATION PRAYING FOR RECALL O F THIS ORDER AND LISTING OF THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON MERITS. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH SEPT.,2019. SD/- ( !' ) (DIVA SINGH) # / JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM (+ ! ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3 $ / / CIT4. $ / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -0 2 , & 2 , 3456 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 5 7% / GUARD FILE (+ $ / BY ORDER, 8 # / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR