M/s. Jay Chem, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,(OSD) Circle-10, Ahmedabad

ITA 640/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6742 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 03-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S P TALATI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND D. C. AGRAWAL , AM) ITA NO.640/AHD/2009 A. Y.: 2004-05 M/S. JAY CHEM, 803, SHIP BUILDING, C. G. ROAD, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD VS THE A. C. I. T. (OSD), RANGE-10, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD PA NO. AACFJ 1923 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI S. N. SOPARKAR, WITH SHRI JAIMIN GANDHI, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. P. TALATI, SR. DR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-XV I, AHMEDABAD DATED 28-11-2007 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. ACCORDING TO COLUMN NO.9 OF THE APPEAL PAPERS, 1 8-01-2008 IS MENTIONED AS DATE OF COMMUNICATION OF THE ORDER APP EALED AGAINST. HOWEVER, THE APPEAL IS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE T RIBUNAL ON 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2009. THUS, THE OFFICE NOTED IN THE APPEA L PAPERS THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TIME BARRED BY 346 DAYS. THE DEFECT MEMO WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE INTIMATING THAT THE AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TIME BARRED BY 346 DAYS AND NO CONDONAT ION PETITION HAS ITA NO.640/AHD/2009 M/S. JAY CHEM VS ACIT (OSD), RANGE-10, AHMEDABAD 2 BEEN FILED ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OR ANY MATERIAL TO EXPLAIN THE ABOVE DELAY IN RESPONSE TO THE DEFECT NOTICE. THE APPEAL WAS, THER EFORE, FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE BENCH BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT T AKE ANY STEP TO FILE ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. ON 2 4-03-2011, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT TIME TO FIL E APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. LAST OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN IN THIS REGARD AND THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 03-05-2011. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ABL E TO FILE ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN THE MATTER. ACCORDING TO RULE 4A (1) (IV) AND (V) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES , IT IS PROVIDED THAT THE DEFECTS IN THE APPEAL PAPERS WILL BE NOTIFIED T O THE PARTIES TO RECTIFY THE DEFECTS AND IN CASE THE DEFECTS ARE NOT RECTIFIED WITHIN THE TIME GRANTED, TO PLACE THE MATTER BEFORE THE BENCH FOR ORDERS. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RESPONDED TO THE DEFECT NOTICE AND DESPITE GIVING SUFFICIENT TIME DID NOT FILE ANY APP LICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND EVEN NO MATERIAL IS PRODUC ED ON RECORD TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR FILING OF THE APPEAL BELATE DLY. IT IS, THEREFORE, CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SATISFY THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT PRESENTING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PERI OD OF LIMITATION. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL ON RECORD A ND FURTHER ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE ANY APPLICATION FOR CONDONA TION OF DELAY EXPLAINING THE REASONS, WE TREAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE TIME BARRED. SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED IN LIMIN E. ITA NO.640/AHD/2009 M/S. JAY CHEM VS ACIT (OSD), RANGE-10, AHMEDABAD 3 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED BEING TIME BARRED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6-05-2011 SD/- SD/- (D. C. AGRAWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 6-05-2011 LAKSHMIKANT/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD