Sh. Sandeep Kumar Jain, Ghaziabad V. ACIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 2306/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2813 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VISMITA TEJ

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2306/DEL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 SANDEEP KUMAR JAIN, KJ - 113, KAVI NAGAR, GHAZIABAD PAN - ABPPJ 1573M (APPELLANT) VS. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2, GHAZIABAD. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SH. ALOK GUPTA, C.A. REVENUE BY MS. VISMITA TEJ, CIT/DR ORDER PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.09.2013 OF LD. CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. 2. THE REGISTRY HAS REPORTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED WITH A DELAY OF 92 DAYS AND THE APPEAL FEE HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN WRONG HEAD. FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, THE APPELLANT HAS FILED AN APPLICATION STATING THEREIN THAT AFTER RECEIPT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE APPELLANT HANDED OVER ITS COPY TO THE STAFF OF ITS AUTHRORISED REPRESENTATIVE, AS THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI DATE OF HEARING 12.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12 .06.2017 ITA NO. 2306/DEL./2014 2 SANDEEP KAPOOR , CA WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE THAT DAY. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE STAFF FORGOT TO INFORM SH. SANDEEP KAPOOR , CA ABOUT THE RECEIPT OF IMPUGNED ORDER FROM THE APPELLANT. IT WAS ONLY WHEN THE APPELLANT ENQUIRED INTO TH E FILING OF APPEAL, THE AR OF APPELLANT FILED THE APPEAL WITH DELAY. THEREFORE, THE DELAY CAUSED IN FILING THE APPEAL WAS DUE TO INADVERTENCY, WHICH DESERVES TO BE CONDONED. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, OPPOSED THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE APPLICATION. 3. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND NO SUBSTANCE IN THE STAND TAKEN BY THE APPELLANT IN THE APPLICATION. IT IS NOTABLE THAT THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE APPLICATION APPEAR VAGUE, AS THE SAME ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD. THE AVERM ENTS MADE IN THE APPLICATION ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY EVEN BY ANY AFFIDAVIT EITHER OF APPELLANT OR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE TO SUPPORT THE REASONS ASSIGNED FOR CONDONATION OF 92 DAYS DELAY CAUSED IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. THE DEFECT OF DEPOSITING THE APPEAL FEE IN WRONG HEAD ALSO DOES NOT STAND REMOVED. THE LACKADAISICAL ATTITUDE OF APPELLANT OR ITS AR FURTHER STANDS CORROBORATED FROM THE GROUND OF ADJOURNMENT SOUGHT ITA NO. 2306/DEL./2014 3 VIDE APPLICATION FILED TODAY WHEREIN THE FILE OF APPELLANT IS FURTHER STATED TO H AVE BEEN MISPLACED. THE BENCH, THEREFORE, REJECTED THE APPLICATION HAVING FOUND NO GOOD GROUND FOR THE ADJOURNMENT. IN PRESENCE OF ALL THESE FACTS , WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT , IN LIMINE, AS BARRED BY LIMITATION, BEING DEFECTIVE. 5. IN THE RESU LT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED, AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.06.2017 . SD/ - SD/ - ( BHAVNESH SAINI) ( L.P. SAHU ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 12.06.2017 *AKS* COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES, NEW DELHI