Prafulbhai N Desai, Valsad V. Assessing Officer Vapi Ward No.7, Vapi

ITA 342/SRT/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0985 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-08-2022
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 271(1)(c); 143(3); 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.342/SRT/2019 Ǔनधा[रणवष[/Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Prafulbhai N. Desai, Flat No.203, E Wing City Point, Near Railway Station, Vapi East, Dist. Valsad, Valsad-396191. Vs. The ITO, Vapi Ward-7, Vapi. (Appellant) (Respondent) èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ADQPD2909N Assessee by None. Respondent by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 31/08/2022 Date of Pronouncement 12/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], in Appeal No. CIT(A)/VLS/133/16-17, dated 22.03.2018 which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 23.03.2016. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite of issuance of notice of hearing, however the Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. DR) for the Revenue was present on behalf of the Department. Notice of hearing of this appeal was sent at the address given by the assessee in Form No.36. Today i.e. on 31.08.02022, when the case was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any written request for adjournment was made, it means that assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. Page | 2 ITA 342/SRT/2019/AY.2013-14 Prafulbhai N. Desai 3. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “1) The order of the Learned Assessing Officer is not correct as per the law and the facts. 2) Of the Learned Assessing Officer added Rs.15849385/- is to be deleted as per para no4 of the order. (We had file in return net profit) 3) Of the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in charging interest u/s 234b & 234c of the Income Tax Act 1961 (As per para no. 10 of Assessment Order) 4) Penalty Proceedings initiated u/s 271(1)(c) to be deleted. 5) The appellant craves leave to add alter vary any of the grounds of second appeal.” 4. At the outset, we note that appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by three hundred sixty five (365) days, the assessee field the petition for condonation of delay, the contents of the petition of contention of delay is reproduced below: 1. That I Am The Prop Of Central Labour Force, The Assessee PANNO ADQPD2909N, And As Such Well Conversant With The Facts Deposed to Below. 2. That The Appeal Filed By me as The Assessee Before The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Was Disposed Of By Order Dated 23/03/2018 Passed By The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). 3. That The Time For Filing Of The Appeal Before This Tribunal Was To Expire On 23/05/2018 4. That I was Advised By The CA To File An appeal before The Hon'ble ITAT For relief But The Appeal Has Already become barred by Time Limitation. Nevertheless The Appeal Was Filed Before This Hon'ble ITAT On Date 23/05/2018 Accompanied By An Application For Condonation Of Delay As Provided Under Section 5 Of The Limitation Act, 1963. 5. The Cause Of Delay Is Medical Grounds (Medical Treatment) Medical Certificate Evidence Attach With Affidavit (date - 18/05/2018 to 15/11/2018 and also till 05/05/2019 in between Mumbai treatment 10/09/2018 to 11/02/2019 The Above Named Deponent, Do Hereby Verify That The Contents Of Paras 1 To 5 Are True To My Personal Knowledge; And Nothing Material Has Been Concealed And No Part Of It Is False. So Help Me God.” 5. We note that assessee has mentioned in his petition for condonation of delay, and stated that due to medical treatment/disease, the assessee could not file appeal before Tribunal on time. We have examined the medical certificate attached with the affidavit and observed that name of disease and kind of Page | 3 ITA 342/SRT/2019/AY.2013-14 Prafulbhai N. Desai treatment are not mentioned. What kind of treatment, the assessee was taking from the Doctor, has not been mentioned. The kind of disease has not been mentioned. It is mentioned in the medical certificate that ‘patient was under my treatment from 01.05.2018 to 30.09.2018”. It is not mentioned in the certificate that what kind of disease the assessee was suffering and kind of treatment, the assessee was getting from the doctor. Hence, such certificate from doctor cannot be relied to condone delay. Hence, we are of the view that assessee has failed to prove “sufficient cause” for the delay, therefore we do not condone delay and hence assessee’s appeal is hereby dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 12/10/2022 by placing the result on the Notice Board. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER lwjr /Surat Ǒदनांक/ Date: 12/10/2022 SAMANTA Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By Order // TRUE COPY // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat