Shri Kalpesh V. Gajjar, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT, Circle-7, Ahmedabad

ITA 2345/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8715 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K SINGH

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 2 345 /AHD/ 201 4 A .Y.: 20 0 7 - 08 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR , AM AND MAHAVIR PRASAD , JM] ITA NO. 2345 / AHD / 2 0 1 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 7 - 08 KALPESH V. GAJJAR, ....... ...........APPELLANT 9, UPVAN, TWIN BUNGAL OWS , NEAR SHYAMAL C HAR RASTA, SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD 380 054. [PAN : AHFPG 9411 K] VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, AHMEDABAD. ............................RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: NONE FOR THE APPELLANT V.K. SING H FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 1 0 .0 8 . 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 17 .08.2017 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR, AM: 1. THIS APPEAL IS TIME BARED BY 1122 DAYS. 2. THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSE SSEE HAS FILED A PETITION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY. THIS PETITION, WHICH IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE , AFFIDAVIT OR EVEN CONFIRMATION BY THE APPELLANT, STATES AS FOLLOWS : - TO THE CHAIRMAN, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 3 RD FLOOR, ABHINAV A RCADE, AHMEDABAD. RESPECTED SIR, ITA NO. 2 345 /AHD/ 201 4 A .Y.: 20 0 7 - 08 PAGE 2 OF 3 SUB: REQUEST TO CONDONE DELAY IN FILLING APPEAL AGAINST ORDER PASSED U/S . 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 I HAD FILED AN APPEAL TO CIT ( A) - VI 08.04.2013 AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY A.O. IN RESPONSE T O SUCH APPEAL LD. CIT PASSED AN ORDER AND DISPATCHED THE SAME DUE TO CHANGE THE RESIDENCE ADDRESS, THE ORDER WAS MISPLACED MY STAFF. HOWEVER, THERE WAS HUGE PAYMENT OF STT AS TAX, THERE WAS NO DEMAND AFTER GETTING NOTICE OF U/S 271 (1) ( C ), WE INQUIRED AND F OUND THE ORDER. THEREFORE, THERE IS INORDINATE DELAY. DUE TO THIS MISTAKE, WE COULD NOT FILE AN APPEAL WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD BUT AS SOON AS WE HAVE RECEIVED THE COPY OF SUCH ORDER WE HAVE PREFERRED AN APPEAL AGAINST THIS ORDER. THEREFORE, WE REQUE ST YOU TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILLING SUCH APPEAL AND ACCEPT THIS APPEAL. THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, FOR, KALPESH V. GAJJAR (A.R.) 3. WE HAVE PERUSED THE PETITION. WE FIND THAT IT IS A V A GUE PETITION, I T DOES NOT GIVE ANY SPECIFIC DETAILS AN D IT DOES NOT ADEQUATELY EXPLAIN EVEN THE DELAY. THE MAT T ER HAS BEEN DEALT WITH IN A CASUAL AND SUPERFICIAL MANNER. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND AS WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO CONDONE THIS DELAY WHICH IS NOT AT ALL EXPLAINED PROPERLY, WE REJECT THE APPEAL AS TIME BARRED. AS THE CONDONATION PETITION AND THE APPEAL ARE DISMISSED, WE SEE NO NEED TO DEAL WITH THE ADJOURNMENT PETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THE CASE DETAILS ARE UNDER COMPILATION. THAT ASPECT OF THE MATTER IS WHOLLY ACADEMIC FOR US. 7 . IN THE RESULT , THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 17 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017. SD/ - SD/ - MAHAVIR PRASAD PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 17 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 ITA NO. 2 345 /AHD/ 201 4 A .Y.: 20 0 7 - 08 PAGE 3 OF 3 PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUN AL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD