IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE , JM IT A NO. 747 /DEL/201 5 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2011 - 1 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEM PTION), DEHRADUN VS SWAMI OMKARANANDA SARSWATI CHARITABLE TRUST, SWAMI OMAKARANANDA MARG, MUNI - KI - RITI, P.O. SHIVANANDANGAW, TEHRI, GARHWAL (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CO NO. 289/DEL/2015 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2011 - 12 SWAMI OMKARANANDA SARSWATI CHARITABLE TRUST, SWAMI OMAKARANANDA MARG, MUNI - KI - RITI, P.O. SHIVANANDANGAW, TEHRI, GARHWAL VS INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), DEHRADUN (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AABTS8947F ASSESSEE BY : SH. C. S. AGARWAL , SR. ADV. & SH. R. P. MALL , ADV. REVENUE BY : SH. KAUSHLENDRA TIWARI , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 30 .0 5 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCE MENT : 30 .05 .201 8 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM : THE APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AND CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2014 OF LD. CIT(A) , DEHRADUN . 2. THE LD. SR. DR SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT STATING THAT MORE TIME WAS REQUIRED FOR PREPARATION OF THE CASE. THE SAID APPLICATION WA S REJECTED SINCE THE APPEAL IS OLD ONE WHICH WAS FILED ON 06.02.2015 AND THE DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN CURED . THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT ITA NO . 747 /DE L/201 5 CO NO. 289/DEL/2015 SWAMI OMKARANANDA SARSWATI CHARITABLE TRUST 2 THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WERE NOT FURNISHED. THE SAID DEFECT WAS NOT CURED. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, T HE LD. SR. DR FURNISHED A PHOTOCOPY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL SIGNED BY CIT(EXEMPTION) AND NOT BY THE CONCERNED ASSESSING OFFICER . E VEN COPY OF THE AUTHORIZATION GIVEN BY THE CONCERNED CIT WAS NOT FURNISHED. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT WAS NEITHER IN PROPER FORM NOR WAS SUPPORTED BY ANY AUTHORIZATION FROM THE LD. CIT , WHO ALONE IS COMPETENT TO FILE AN APPEAL U/S 253(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT A VALID APPEAL. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT A DEFECT MEMO WAS ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY TO THE DEPARTMENT BUT THE SAME HAD NOT BEEN RESPONDED TO OR THE PURPORTED DEFECT WAS REMOVED. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT WHERE AN APPEAL FILED HAS NOT BEEN SUPPO RTED BY THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR IS NOT IN A PROPER FORM, IT IS NO APPEAL IN THE EYES OF LAW, M ORE SO WHEN AT THE TIME OF FILING THE APPEAL, THERE WAS NOT EVEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE LD. CIT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS WITHOUT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CIT SO THIS IS NOT A VALID APPEAL. IN THE PRESENT CASE, DEFECT MEMO WAS ISS UED TO THE APPELLANT I.E. THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT BUT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN RESPONDED TO AND DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED DESPITE OF ITA NO . 747 /DE L/201 5 CO NO. 289/DEL/2015 SWAMI OMKARANANDA SARSWATI CHARITABLE TRUST 3 OPPORTUNITY BEING GIVEN, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED. 6. SINCE, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPAR TMENT HAS BE EN DISMISSED, THE CROSS OBJECTION ARISING OUT OF THE SAID APPEAL WHICH HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT AND CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT O N 30 /0 5 / 201 8 ) SD/ - SD/ - ( SUCHITRA KAMBLE ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 30 /05 /2018 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(APPEALS) 5 . DR: ITAT ASSIS TANT REGISTRAR