M/s. Clearline Industries, Daman V. The Income Tax Offier,Ward-4, Vapi

ITA 1454/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94699 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 12-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALA PHILIPS

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 1454/AHD/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 M/S. CLEARLINE INDUSTRIES, PLOT NO.1, GALA NO.4, RANGANWADA, VAPI-DAMAN ROAD, DAMAN PAN : AAEFC 8112 B VS. ITO, WARD-4, VAPI / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI LALA PHILIPS, SR. DR. !'# / DATE OF HEARING : 17/11/2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 19/11/2015 / O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), VALSAD DATED 26.02.2014 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF HEARING, NO ONE HAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LEARNED DE PARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAR EFULLY. IT EMERGES OUT FROM THE RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS APP EAL LATE BY SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE CIT(A). ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED CIT(A) , THE APPEAL, AS PER SECTION 249(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, WAS TO BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE SERVICE OF ASSESSMENT ORDER AND NOTICE OF DE MAND. SUCH ORDER WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ON 19.12.2011 AND THE APPE AL WAS PRESENTED BEFORE ITA NO. 1454/AHD/2014 M/S. CLEARLINE INDUSTRIES VS. ITO FOR AY: 2006-07 2 THE CIT(A) ON 19.06.2012. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIL E ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. THEREFORE, LEARNED FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL BEING TIME BARRED. BEFORE US ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY PAPER-BOOK NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDON ATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A); THUS, THE APPEAL ITSE LF IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. IT IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 19 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 19/11/2015 BIJU T., PS !&''()(*' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! ' # / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' # ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. &'( ! , ! , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. (- ./ / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD