M/s. Radhekiran Pulsus Pvt.Ltd, Aurangabad V. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -1, , Aurangabad

ITA 1531/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2859 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.1531 & 1532/PUN/2019 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s. Radhekiran Pulsus Pvt. Ltd., Shop No.39/40, Hall No.3, APMC Market Yard, Jalgaon Road, Jadhavwadi, Aurangabad- 431001. PAN : AAFCR6965D Vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Aurangabad. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: These are the appeals filed by the assessee directed against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Aurangabad [‘the CIT(A)’] dated 21.02.2019 and 27.02.2019 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. 2. Since the identical facts and common issues are involved in both the appeals of the assessee, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order. Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date of hearing : 12.09.2022 Date of pronouncement : 26.09.2022 ITA Nos.1531 & 1532/PUN/2019 2 3. At the outset, when the appeals were called on for hearing before us, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. However, there is an application moved by one Shri M. K. Kulkarni, Advocate seeking adjournment of the matter on the ground that the files of the above captioned appeals were not received in his office. We find from the records that these matters were earlier adjourned on four occasions at the request of the Senior Counsel. Since no reasonable and sufficient cause was shown for the adjournment, the petition for adjournment stands rejected. 4. We find that there is a delay in filing the present appeals by 60 days. The appellant filed single condonation petition for condoning the delay in both the appeals citing that the appellant was suffering from high fever upto end of June, 2019. However, we find that the appeals were to be filed by on or before 01.10.2019. Therefore, reason cited in the petition does not constitute sufficient and reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeal. No further reasonable cause were cited in the condonation petition, therefore, the condonation petition is not only invalid but also does not give a valid reason for condoning the delay in filing the appeals. Hence, ITA Nos.1531 & 1532/PUN/2019 3 we find the delay in filing the present appeals cannot be condoned. Thus, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed in limine. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stands dismissed. Order pronounced on this 26 th day of September, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 26 th September, 2022. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Aurangabad. 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Aurangabad. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.