RAM GOPAL SONI,JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-7(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 778/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ram Gopal Soni, the appellant, who challenged an order from the CIT(A) relating to the assessment year 2014-15. The appeal was filed significantly late, 652 days beyond the prescribed period, accompanied by a request for condonation of delay citing medical issues due to COVID-19. Despite multiple adjournments, the appellant failed to appear before the tribunal to substantiate the reasons for the delay. The tribunal, after considering the absence of the appellant and the lack of sufficient cause for the delay, dismissed both the application for condonation and the appeal itself.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792961 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2025
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Period of limitation

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihyla-@ITA No. 778/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2014-15 Ram Gopal Soni Near Bus Stand, Village & Post-jalsu, via Jahota, Tehsil Amer, Jaipur. cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No.: AZMPS2524C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : None jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing :23/09/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . Present appeal came to be presented on 13.05.2025, while challenging order dated 02.05.2023, passed by Learned CIT(A), relating to the assessment year 2014-15, whereby the appeal filed by the assessee, challenging assessment order dated 30.12.2016, came to be dismissed. The Registry raised a deficiency note that the appeal came to be filed 652 days after the prescribed period of limitation. The appeal is accompanied by an application seeking condonation of delay. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 778/JPR/2025 Ram Gopal Soni, Jaipur. 2. The assessee has alleged that medical ground was the reason for non filing of the appeal within the prescribed period. After filing of the appeal with the application seeking condonation of delay, the matter was taken up on 12.08.2025, but none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notwithstanding absence of the assessee, in the interest of justice, the matter was adjourned to 27.08.2025, but, even on that date none appeared on behalf of the applicant-appellant. Once again, in the interest of justice the matter was adjourned for today. However, it is significant to note that despite wait, none has appeared on behalf of the appellant. 3. We have heard Ld. DR for the department. Learned DR has submitted that the applicant has failed to prove that there was any sufficient cause for non- filing of the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, and that even none has cared to appear before this Appellate Tribunal to press the application. The contention is that accordingly the application as well as the appeal deserve to be dismissed. 4. As per application seeking condonation of delay, the applicant alleged that he remained bed ridden for 4 or 5 months due to medical reasons, particularly on account of side effects of Corona pandemic. Later Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 778/JPR/2025 Ram Gopal Soni, Jaipur. on his lungs suffered from infection. As a result, he could not present appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. 5. As noticed above, despite 3 opportunities none has appeared on behalf of the assessee-appellant to satisfy the Appellate Tribunal that there was any sufficient cause in filing of the appeal, beyond prescribed period of limitation. Since the assessee-applicant has failed to justify late filing of the appeal, we hold that the appeal is barred by limitation and deserves to be dismissed. Result 6. In view of the above discussion, the application seeking condonation of delay is hereby dismissed, and resultantly, the appeal is also dismissed being barred by limitation. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 24/09/2025 Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 778/JPR/2025 Ram Gopal Soni, Jaipur. *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Ram Gopal Soni, Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-7(3), Jaipur. 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ Theld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 778/JPR/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;diathdkj@Asstt. Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "