Raj Narayan Yadav, Ballia V. Dy.CIT, Circle - 02, Varanasi

ITA 90/VNS/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1231 (ITAT-VARANASI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CIRCUIT ‘SMC’ BENCH, VARANASI BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.90/VNS/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Raj Narayan Yadav, MIG-17 Chandrashekhar Nagar, Ballia, U.P. PAN-AALPY3338A v. Dy. CIT, Circle-2, Varanasi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 23.05.2022 Date of pronouncement: 25.05.2022 O R D E R SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.05.2018 of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing despite the notice sent to the assessee through speed post AD as well as E-mail at the E-mail ID given in Form No. 36. The notice sent through registered post has been received back with the postal remarks “No such address”. Further it transpires from the record that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn. Accordingly, the appeal was taken up for hearing and disposal ex parte. 3. I have heard the learned DR and carefully perused the impugned order of the CIT(A) which reads as under:- ITA No.90/VNS/2020 2 ITA No.90/VNS/2020 3 4. Thus, it is clear that before the CIT(A), the Authorized Representative of the assessee appeared and requested for withdrawal of the appeal. The CIT(A) allowed the request of the withdrawal and consequently the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. Thus, the present appeal of the assessee against the impugned order of the CIT(A) is not maintainable. Further, the appeal of the assessee is filed belatedly after a delay of about six months. The assessee though filed an affidavit for condonation of delay but no explanation is furnished in the said affidavit which says he did not receive the impugned order of the CIT(A) due to some differences with the counsel. Hence, in view of the fact that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the CIT(A) as withdrawn by the assessee then the present appeal is dismissed being non maintainable. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.05.2022. Sd/- [VIJAY PAL RAO] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:25/05/2022 Varanasi Sh Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A),Varanasi 4. CIT 5. DR By order Sr. P.S. ITA No.90/VNS/2020 4