M. Sathyanarayana Setty, Bangalore V. Income tax Officer, Ward-6(2)(2), Bangalore

ITA 1888/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7584 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KARUPPUSAMY S R
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH SMC-C, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1888 (BANG) 2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 08) SHRI M. SATHYANARAYAN SETTY, APPELLANT NO. 105, 3 RD MAIN ROAD, I CROSS, VHBCS LAYOUT, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BANGALORE 560086. PAN. ALTPS1459B VS THE ITO, WARD 8 (1), NOW WARD 6 (2) (2), BANGALORE. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI KARUPPUSAMY S. R., ADDL. CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 30-07-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-07-2018 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS DIRE CTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) 6 BANGALORE DATED 28.02.2018 FOR A. Y. 20 07 08. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING FIRST ON 04.07 .2018. ON THIS DATE, LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE MS SUMAN LUNKAR, CHARTERED ACCOUNTA NT APPEARED AND FILED2 SETS OF PAPER BOOK ALONG WITH PETITION FOR CONDONAT ION OF DELAY ALONG WITH AN AFFIDAVIT. ON HER REQUEST, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNE D TO 19.07.2018. ON THIS DATE AGAIN, LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 30.07.2018. ON 30.07.2018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THERE IS NO REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. HENCE, THE APP EAL WAS HEARD EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUBMITTED T HAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE CONDONED. ON MERIT, HE SUPPORT ED THE ORDER OF CIT (A). ITA NO. 1888(BANG)2018 2 3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORDS. I FIND THAT ALTHOUGH AN APPLICATION IS MADE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 4 DAYS IN FILING T HE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND SOME REASONS ARE GIVEN FOR SUCH DELAY BUT NO EV IDENCE IS FILED TO SUPPORT THE REASONS GIVEN THAT HIS PARENTS WERE SICK AND TH E ASSESSEE HAD IN FACT GONE TO HIS NATIVE PLACE TO ATTEND HIS AILING PARENTS. N O DETAIL AS TO WHEN THE ASSESSEE WENT TO HIS NATIVE AND HE WAS NOT IN A POS ITION TO COME BACK PRIOR O 30.05.2018 BEING THE DATE THE ASSESSEE HAS COME BAC K AS STATED IN THE APPLICATION. NOBODY HAS APPEARED BEFORE ME TO ARGUE ABOUT CONDONATION OF DELAY OR MERIT OF THE APPEAL. HENCE, I INFER THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL AND THEREFORE, BY FOLLOWING THE TRIBUNAL ORDER RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD. AS REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320, THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED BY TREATING THE SAME AS UNADMITTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 31 ST JULY, 2018. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.