IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.3228, 3229 & 3230 / AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) THE SURAT DISTT. COOP. MILK PODUCERS UNION LTD., SUMUL DAIRY ROAD, STATION ROAD, SURAT-395003 VS. ADDL. CIT, RANGE 9, SURAT PAN/GIR NO. : AAAAS3450M (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI MITISH MODI, AR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI B.L. YADAV, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 12.07.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31.08.2012 O R D E R PER SHRI A. K. GARODIA, AM:- ALL THESE THREE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECT ED AGAINST THREE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A) - V, SURAT DATED 23.1 0.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, DATED 15.09.2009 FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08 AND DATED 15.03.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8-09. ALL THESE THREE APPEALS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 22.12.2011 AN D HENCE, THERE IS DELAY OF 552 DAYS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, 377 DAYS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AND 551 DAYS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 008-09. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CONDONATION PETITION FOR CONDO NATION OF DELAY FOR THESE THREE APPEALS ALONG WITH AN AFFIDAVIT OF MR. SKRL BHATT, SR. EXECUTIVE (ACCOUNTS) OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE SAID CONDONATION PETITION, IT I.T.A.NO. 3228,3229,3030 /AHD/2011 2 WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) HAD BEEN KEPT BY MR. SKRL BHATT, SR. EXECUTIVE (ACCOUNTS) IN HIS DRAWER WITH AN IMPRESSION THAT THE APPEALS HAVE BEEN ALLOWED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEED FOR FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUN AL. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ON 17.12.2011, THE SAID SR. EXECUTIV E APPROACHED THE TAX CONSULTANT I.E. C.A. NITISH MODI FOR DISCUSSION AND CLARIFICATION REGARDING PENDENCY OF REFUND AND THEN IT WAS ADVISED BY THE T AX CONSULTANT THAT SINCE THE APPEALS HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ON FACTUAL ASPE CTS OF THE CASE AND NOT ON THE PROPER INTERPRETATION OF LAW FOR THE CLAIM O F DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, THE APPEALS SHOULD BE FIL ED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, DELAY SHOULD BE CONDONED. 2. WHILE EXAMINING THE REQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF D ELAY, WE FIND THAT ALL THE THREE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE ALLOWED BY LD. CIT(A) AND HENCE, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ACADE MIC IN NATURE. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS FOR SUCH ACADEMIC ISSUE IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND, THERE FORE, THE DELAY IS NOT CONDONED AND THESE APPEALS ARE NOT ADMITTED. 3. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE DISMISSED AS NOT ADMITTED. 4. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE M ENTIONED HEREINABOVE. SD./- SD./- (KUL BHARAT) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP I.T.A.NO. 3228,3229,3030 /AHD/2011 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BY ORDER 6. THE GUARD FILE AR,ITAT,AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION 28/08/12 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 31/08/12 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P .S./P.S. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 31/08/2012 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S.31/8/12 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 31/08/2012 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER. .