M/S.DESIGNER WORLD PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER -9(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5186/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5246 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SMITA VERMA
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Right to appeal
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

1 ITA 5186 /MUM /201 8 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. NO. 518 6 /MUM/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09 - 1 0 ) M/S DESIGNER WORLD PVT LTD 603/604, SUNDERVAN, A/4, OFF LOKHANDWALA ROAD, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI - 400 053 PAN : AAFFD2583A V S THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER - 9(3)(1) MUMBAI APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY MS. SMITA VERMA, DR DATE OF HEARING 1 2 - 0 4 - 2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 0 3 - 0 5 - 2021 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 25 - 0 9 - 201 7 OF L EARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS) - 16 , MUMBAI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09 - 1 0 . 2. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE CASE. EVEN, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. ON PERUSAL OF RECORDS, IT IS NOTED, THOUGH , THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FIXED FROM TIME TO TIME SINCE 14 - 08 - 2019, THE ASSESSEE HAS NEVER APPEARED TO REPRESENT THE CASE. ON ONE OCCASION, I.E. ON 20 - 02 - 2020 AN APPLICAT ION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS MOVED BY LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, ON SUBSEQUENT DATES AGAIN THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT. 2 ITA 5186 /MUM /201 8 FROM THE AFORESAID FACTS, IT IS VERY MUCH CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NEITHER DILIGENT NOR INTERESTED IN PUR SUING ITS APPEAL. THEREFORE, I PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. PERTINENTLY, THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT A DELAY OF 257 D AYS IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. TH OUGH, IN LETTER DATED 06 - 09 - 2018 THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS REQUESTED FOR CONDONING THE DELAY , HOWEVER, N O SATISFACTORY REASON S FOR CONDONING THE DELAY HAVE BEEN PROVIDED IN THE SAID APPLICATION. IT IS FAI RLY WELL SETTLED, THE RIGHT TO FILE AN APPEAL UNDER THE INCOME T AX ACT IS A STATUTORY RIGHT CIRCUMSCRIBED BY CERTAIN CONDITIONS . T HOUGH , THE STATUTE EMPOWERS THE TRIBUNAL TO ADMIT AN APPEAL BEYOND THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION PRESCRIBED THEREIN ; HOWEVER, IT CA N ONLY BE CONDONED IF THE TRIBUNAL IS SATISFIED THAT THE DELAY IS CAUSED DUE TO SATISFACTORY REASONS. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT APPEAL, THE CAUSE SHOWN FOR DELAY IS RATHER VAGUE AND IN GENERAL TERMS. TH US , THE REASON PUT FORTH FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, I N MY VIEW, IS UNSATISFACTORY. THEREFORE, I DECLINE TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 257 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL IS DISMISSED WITHOUT BEING ADMITTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 0 3 /0 5 /2021. S D / - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DT : 0 3 /0 5 /2021 PAVANAN 3 ITA 5186 /MUM /201 8 COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI