B. S. Construction, Ballia V. Dy. CIT, Circle - 2, Varanasi

ITA 92/VNS/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0987 (ITAT-VARANASI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2022
• 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

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CIRCUIT ‘SMC’ BENCH, VARANASI BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.92/VNS/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 B.S. Construction, Pura Dular Rai, Ballia, U.P. PAN-AAKFB0398N v. Dy. CIT, Circle-2,Varanasi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 05.07.2022 Date of pronouncement: 02.08.2022 O R D E R SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 9.7.2018 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. It transpires from the record that nobody has appeared on behalf of the assessee since beginning despite the repeated notices were issued to the assessee by RPAD as well as through email at the email ID given in the Form No. 36. Accordingly, the Bench proposes to hear and dispose of this appeal, ex parte. 3. At the outset, it is noted that the assessee has filed present appeal on 19 th March, 2020 against the impugned order dated 9.7.2018. The assessee has stated in the Form No. 36 that the impugned order was served on the assessee on 16.10.2018. Therefore, there is a delay of one year and four months in filing the present appeal and the assessee has explained the cause of delay as there was misunderstanding between the assessee and his counsel which has led to delay in filing the present appeal. ITA No.92/VNS/2020 B.S. Construction, Ballia 2 4. I have gone through the contents of the copy of the affidavit filed by the assessee and find that the assessee has not given the facts and circumstances leading to the misunderstanding between the assessee and its counsel resulting the delay in filing the present appeal. The reasons explained by the assessee are very vague and not giving a single detail about the enquiry made by the assessee about the status of the appeal filed before the CIT(A) or outcome of the appeal. Accordingly, in the absence of the necessary detail and proper explanation of the cause of delay, I decline to condone the delay of more than one year and four months in filing the present appeal. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed being barred by limitation. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed being not maintainable. Order pronounced on 02.08.2022 at Allahabad, U.P. in accordance with Rule 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- [VIJAY PAL RAO] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 02/08/2022 Varanasi/Allahabad Sh Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant- B.S. Construction, Ballia 2. Respondent- Dy. CIT, Circle-2, Varanasi 3. CIT(A),Varanasi 4. CIT 5. DR By order Sr. P.S.