M/S. PATEL RAJESHKUMAR MAGANLAL & CO.,SURAT V. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 54/AHD/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Patel Rajeshkumar Maganlal & Co., who appealed against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, for the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was filed with significant delay and was repeatedly adjourned due to non-appearance of the assessee or their representatives. The tribunal noted the assessee's failure to address the defects in the appeal, including the substantial delay and lack of coordination among their professional advisors. Despite being given multiple opportunities to rectify these issues, the assessee failed to do so, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298694 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAVAN LIMBASIYA
• Assessee Lawyers: JAINISH PARIKH

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.54/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s.Patel Rajeshkumar Maganlal & Co. 2, Pooja Park Apartment Dhobi Sheri Haripura, Surat. PAN : AAFFP 7560 F Vs. DCIT, Cent.Cir.1(2) Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri Jainish Parikh, CA Revenue by : Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR सुनवाई क\t तारीख/Date of Hearing : 27/02/2025 घोषणा क\t तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/03/2025 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The above appeal is filed by the assessee against order passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad dated 14.9.2018 under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\" for short] for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The assessee has filed its appeal on February 21, 2022. A review of the order sheet reveals that the appeal has been listed for hearing for more than 35 occasions. However, in the majority of these instances, the proceedings had to be adjourned either at the request of the assessee or due to non-appearance by the assessee or its authorized representatives. ITA No.54 /Ahd/2022 2 3. It is pertinent to note that in June 2024, the Bench had specifically directed the assessee to rectify certain defects in the appeal. One of the primary defects, as notified by the Registry of the ITAT, was an inordinate delay of 1,165 days in filing the appeal. Additionally, other defects were also communicated to the assessee by the Registry. Despite being made aware of these issues, including during a hearing held approximately ten months back, the assessee has failed to take any steps to rectify the discrepancies, except for submitting a brief note citing general contentions for the delay. 4. The assessee has attributed the delay in filing the appeal to the following reasons: • The partners of the assessee-firm were uneducated and relied entirely on professional advisors. • The responsibility for filing the appeal was entrusted to Mr.Rajendrakumar Jindal, Chartered Accountant. • There was a lack of coordination between the CA firms at Ahmedabad and Surat. • The assessee was under a bona fide impression that due compliance had been made by its representatives. • Upon later inquiry with the Chartered Accountant’s firm, the assessee realized that no appeal had been filed on its behalf, leading to the belated filing. Notably no affidavit has been filed by any of the Chartered Accountants involved, explaining their inaction or the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT. 5. Furthermore, the assessee has now submitted a letter dated February 26, 2025, seeking yet another adjournment on the grounds of the non-availability of its authorized representative. However, considering the conduct of the assessee throughout these ITA No.54 /Ahd/2022 3 proceedings, we find no merit in this plea. The assessee has consistently failed to act in good faith, neglected to rectify the defects pointed out by the Registry, and has demonstrated an evident lack of diligence in prosecuting its appeal. Consequently, we hold that the appeal is not maintainable. Further, it is observed that even during the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not appear, leaving the CIT(A) with no option but to pass an ex parte order. The assessee’s persistent non-cooperation and casual approach in pursuing its case cannot be condoned. Such conduct deserves no leniency and must be discouraged to uphold the discipline of judicial proceedings. 6. Considering the fact that the assessee has failed to justify the delay in filing of the present appeal of 1165 days, the present appeal we hold, is not maintainable. Given the stubborn inaction of the assessee and its failure to prosecute the appeal in a diligent manner, we find no other recourse but to dismiss the appeal as non-maintainable. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assesse is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 7th March, 2025 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad,dated 07/03/2025 vk* "