, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BE NCH, MUMBAI , !' $ $ $ $ % & ' , !' ( BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I .T.A. NO. 8525/MUM/2011 ( ) ) ) ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SHRI BHOLANATH RAJPATI SHUKLA, PROP. OF M/S. S.S. ENTERPRISES), FLAT NO. B-101, JUPITER APARTMENT, POONAM SAGAR COMPLEX, MIRA ROAD (E), THANE-401 107 / VS. THE ITO, WARD 2(3), MUMBAI '* ./ +, ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ABFPR 2174Q ( *- / APPELLANT ) .. ( ./*- / RESPONDENT ) *- 0 / APPELLANT BY: NONE ./*- 1 0 / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI VIVEK PERAMPURNA 1 %2 / DATE OF HEARING :09.12.2014 34) 1 %2 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :09.12.2014 !& / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-II, THANE DT.22.9.2011 PERTAINING TO A.Y.200 7-08. 2. THE APPEAL IS LATE BY 25 DAYS. OFFICE OF THE IN COME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HAS POINTED OUT THE DEFECTS IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. FIRSTLY, THE TRIBUNAL FEES WAS SHORT BY RS. 9,000/- , SECONDLY THE ITA NO. 8525/M/2011 2 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT IS NOT CORRECTLY SHOWN IN THE APPEAL FORM AND THIRDLY THE APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 25 DAYS. NON E OF THESE DEFECTS HAVE BEEN RECTIFIED BY THE ASSESSEE NOR ANYONE ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS, WE ARE THEREFORE LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO DISMISS TH E APPEAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9 TH DECEMBER, 2014 SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) !' /JUDICIAL MEMBER !' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 5! DATED :9 TH DECEMBER, 2014 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS !& !& !& !& 1 11 1 .% .% .% .% 6)% 6)% 6)% 6)% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./*- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 7 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 7 / CIT 5. 89 .% , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 9: ; / GUARD FILE. !& !& !& !& / BY ORDER, /% .% //TRUE COPY// < << < / = = = = + + + + (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI