M/s J.T.G. Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh V. ACIT, Mandi Gobindgarh

ITA 777/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8335 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 777/CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 M/S J.T.G. ALLOYS PVT. LTD., VS THE ACIT, G.T. ROAD, CIRCLE, SIRHIND SIDE, MANDI GOBINDGARH. MANDI GOBINDGARH. PAN: AAACJ5858J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SING H RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 29.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.03.2016 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) PATIALA DATED 26.02.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT PAID THE TAX ON THE INCOME RE TURNED BY HIM OR AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT OF ADVANCE TAX PAYABLE BY HIM IF NO RETURN IS FILED. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY REPLY BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE L D. CIT(APPEALS), THEREFORE, DISMISSED THE APPEAL BECAU SE THE APPEAL CANNOT BE ADMITTED AS REQUISITE TAX HAS NOT BEEN PAID. 2 3. THIS APPEAL IS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE TRIBUN AL ON 09.07.2013 AND THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO. 9 OF THE FORM NO. 36 MENTIONED 20 TH MARCH, 2013 AS THE DATE OF COMMUNICATION OF THE ORDER APPEALED AGAINST. THUS, THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 51 DAYS. 4. DESPITE NOTIFYING TO THE ASSESSEE THAT APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 51 DAYS, ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY APPLIC ATION OR EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY IN FILING T HE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE'S COUNSEL HAS TAKEN SEVERAL ADJOURNMEN TS FOR FILING THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. H OWEVER, TILL DATE, NO STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND NO APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY . NO EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL HAS ALSO BEEN PRODUCED TO EXPL AIN THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. TH US, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION OR MATERIAL ON RECORD, W E HOLD THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE TIME BARRED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED BEING TIME BARRED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (RANO JAIN) (BHAVN ESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 30 TH MARCH,2016. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD