JAYGANGA EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE V. DCIT4(3) (1), MUMBAI

ITA 4406/MUM/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd. against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)–3, Bhopal, for the assessment year 2013–14. The appeal challenged several additions made by the assessing officer, including substantial amounts under sections 68 and 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, related to unexplained cash credits and unexplained expenditure, respectively. The Tribunal noted that the appeal was filed with a significant delay and was also defective as it was not signed by the Managing Director of the company. Despite these issues, the Tribunal proceeded to dismiss the appeal due to the lack of a formal request for condonation of delay and supporting reasons, as required under section 253(5) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788426 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 05-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAVITHA KAUSHIK
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Unexplained expenditure; Transactions in derivatives; Right to appeal
• Section: 68; 69C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd., 852, Sudama Nagar, Infront of Jain Mandir, Indore-452009. Vs. DCIT 4(3)(1), Room No. 649, 6th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN NO. AAACJ 8822 E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12/11/2025 Date of pronouncement : 26/11/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.12.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)–3, Bhopal [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2013–14. The assessee has raised multiple grounds challenging, inter alia: (i) addition of ₹44,01,04,000/- under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”); (ii) addition of ₹15,54,465/- relating to alleged penny stock Printed from counselvise.com transactions; (iii) addition of unexplained expenditure; (iv) addition of of the transaction value of commodity transactions; and (v) addition of interest income amounting to ₹8,85,20,465/ 2. At the outset, we may like to mention that none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice was issued by registered post on 28th August, 2025 though postal authorities. The envelope has not been returned undelivered, and hence, by virtue of the General Clauses Act, service is d The assessee has neither attended the proceedings nor sought adjournment. We are therefore satisfied that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Accordingly, we proceed to dispose of the appeal Departmental Representative (DR) and perusing the material available on record. 3. At the threshold, the registry has reported a delay of in filing the appeal. Further, the appeal was also noted to be defective as it was assessee-company. When the matter was taken up, no application for condonation of delay, nor any affidavit setting out reasons for delay, was found on record. Although column 11 of Form No. 36 Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 transactions; (iii) addition of ₹11,08,57,180/- under section 69C for lained expenditure; (iv) addition of ₹14,58,70,458/ of the transaction value of ₹14,58,70,45,800/- commodity transactions; and (v) addition of interest income 8,85,20,465/-. At the outset, we may like to mention that despite due notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice was issued by registered post on 28th August, 2025 though postal authorities. The envelope has not been returned undelivered, and hence, by virtue of the General Clauses Act, service is deemed to have been effected. The assessee has neither attended the proceedings nor sought adjournment. We are therefore satisfied that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Accordingly, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and perusing the material At the threshold, the registry has reported a delay of in filing the appeal. Further, the appeal was also noted to be it was not signed by the Managing Director company. When the matter was taken up, no application for condonation of delay, nor any affidavit setting out reasons for delay, was found on record. Although column 11 of Form No. 36 Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd 2 ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 under section 69C for 14,58,70,458/- being 1% in share and commodity transactions; and (v) addition of interest income despite due notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice was issued by registered post on 28th August, 2025 though postal authorities. The envelope has not been returned undelivered, and hence, by virtue of eemed to have been effected. The assessee has neither attended the proceedings nor sought adjournment. We are therefore satisfied that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Accordingly, we proceed to he assessee after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and perusing the material At the threshold, the registry has reported a delay of 96 days in filing the appeal. Further, the appeal was also noted to be not signed by the Managing Director of the company. When the matter was taken up, no application for condonation of delay, nor any affidavit setting out reasons for delay, was found on record. Although column 11 of Form No. 36 Printed from counselvise.com acknowledges the existence of delay, not constitute a valid request for condonation 4. We have heard submission of the Ld. DR and perused the material placed on record. consideration is whether, in the absence of any application or affidavit explaining the delay, an appeal filed beyond the period prescribed under section 253(3) can be entertained by the Tribunal? 4.1 It is a trite law that and the conditions subject to which such right may be exercised are equally statutory. Section filed within the prescribed period. Section Tribunal to admit an appeal after expiry of limitati satisfied that the appellant had “sufficient cause” for not presenting the appeal within such period. 253(5) is conditioned upon the assessee demonstrating, by way of formal request supported by reason cause for the delay. squarely upon the assessee. 253(5) is conditioned upon the assessee demonstrating, by way of formal request supported by re cause for the delay. 4.2 In the present case, it is admitted position the appeal has been filed belatedly. However, the assessee has neither filed any petition Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 acknowledges the existence of delay, mere acknowledgment does not constitute a valid request for condonation under the Act. We have heard submission of the Ld. DR and perused the material placed on record. The central issue that arises for our hether, in the absence of any application or affidavit explaining the delay, an appeal filed beyond the period prescribed under section 253(3) can be entertained by the Tribunal? law that the right of appeal is a creature of stat and the conditions subject to which such right may be exercised are equally statutory. Section 253(3) mandates that an appeal shall be filed within the prescribed period. Section 253(5) Tribunal to admit an appeal after expiry of limitati satisfied that the appellant had “sufficient cause” for not presenting the appeal within such period. Thus the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 253(5) is conditioned upon the assessee demonstrating, by way of formal request supported by reasons the existence of sufficient cause for the delay. The burden to satisfy these conditions lies squarely upon the assessee. Thus the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 253(5) is conditioned upon the assessee demonstrating, by way of formal request supported by reasons the existence of sufficient In the present case, it is admitted position the appeal has been filed belatedly. However, the assessee has neither filed any petition Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd 3 ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 mere acknowledgment does under the Act. We have heard submission of the Ld. DR and perused the The central issue that arises for our hether, in the absence of any application or affidavit explaining the delay, an appeal filed beyond the period prescribed under section 253(3) can be entertained by the Tribunal? the right of appeal is a creature of statute, and the conditions subject to which such right may be exercised are mandates that an appeal shall be 253(5) empowers the Tribunal to admit an appeal after expiry of limitation only if it is satisfied that the appellant had “sufficient cause” for not presenting Thus the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 253(5) is conditioned upon the assessee demonstrating, by way of s the existence of sufficient The burden to satisfy these conditions lies Thus the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 253(5) is conditioned upon the assessee demonstrating, by way of asons the existence of sufficient In the present case, it is admitted position the appeal has been filed belatedly. However, the assessee has neither filed any petition Printed from counselvise.com for condonation of delay nor any affidavit explaining the reasons that prevented the filing of appeal within limitation. During the course of hearing neither the assessee attended nor any explanation was offered in writing to cure the defect for invoking t discretionary jurisdiction u/s 253(5). absence of any material on record, assume the existence of sufficient cause or supply reasons on behalf of the assessee. To do so would be to rewrite the statutory conditions or d legislative intent governing limitation. The law does not contemplate condonation on the basis of conjecture, sympathy, or mere acknowledgment of delay. whatsoever there is no material before us on the bas delay could be condoned. exercising jurisdiction under section 253(5) remains wholly unfulfilled, the appeal that the appeal is barred by limitation any request or cause shown for condonation, is dismissed in-limine as barred by limitation. However it is made clear that assessee is it liberty for seeking revival of the appeal if so advised by way of filing proper condonation of the delay supported by the cogent reasons and evidences. Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 for condonation of delay nor any affidavit explaining the reasons that prevented the filing of appeal within limitation. During the course of hearing neither the assessee attended nor any explanation was offered in writing to cure the defect for invoking t discretionary jurisdiction u/s 253(5). The Tribunal cannot, in absence of any material on record, assume the existence of sufficient cause or supply reasons on behalf of the assessee. To do so would be to rewrite the statutory conditions or d legislative intent governing limitation. The law does not contemplate condonation on the basis of conjecture, sympathy, or mere acknowledgment of delay. In absence of any application, affidavit whatsoever there is no material before us on the bas delay could be condoned. Since the mandatory pre exercising jurisdiction under section 253(5) remains wholly unfulfilled, the appeal cannot be admitted in law.We therefore hold barred by limitation and, being unsupported by any request or cause shown for condonation, is as barred by limitation. However it is made clear that assessee is it liberty for seeking revival of the appeal if so advised by way of filing properly constituted an application of of the delay supported by the cogent reasons and Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd 4 ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 for condonation of delay nor any affidavit explaining the reasons that prevented the filing of appeal within limitation. During the course of hearing neither the assessee attended nor any explanation was offered in writing to cure the defect for invoking the Tribunal’s The Tribunal cannot, in absence of any material on record, assume the existence of sufficient cause or supply reasons on behalf of the assessee. To do so would be to rewrite the statutory conditions or dilute the legislative intent governing limitation. The law does not contemplate condonation on the basis of conjecture, sympathy, or mere In absence of any application, affidavit whatsoever there is no material before us on the basis of which the Since the mandatory pre-condition for exercising jurisdiction under section 253(5) remains wholly We therefore hold and, being unsupported by any request or cause shown for condonation, is liable to be as barred by limitation. However it is made clear that assessee is it liberty for seeking revival of the appeal if so ly constituted an application of of the delay supported by the cogent reasons and Printed from counselvise.com 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is not admitted. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 26/11/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 In the result, appeal of the assessee is not admitted. ounced in the open Court on 26/11/2025. SANDEEP GOSAIN) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Jayganga Exim India Pvt. Ltd 5 ITA No. 4406/MUM/2025 In the result, appeal of the assessee is not admitted. /11/2025. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "