"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (HYBRID HEARING) श्री एस बालाक ृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य एिं श्री संदीप धसंह करहैल, न्याधयक सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 452/VIZ/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Ramu Musunuri Rangapuram Lingapalem Mandal West Godavari - 534462 [PAN: BKTPM5748E] v. Income Tax Officer 23-B-4-6/4 Income Tax Office KKS Towers, R.R.Pet Eluru – 534002 (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व / Assessee Represented by : Shri ASRSS Siva Prasad, CA राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented by : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.AR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 19.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. The present appeal was e-filed by the assessee on 31.10.2022. From the perusal of the record, we find that the Registry of the Tribunal, vide notice dated 06.11.2024, notified certain defects in filing the present appeal. We find that, apart from filing Form No. 36 and the ground of appeal, no other documents/orders, as prescribed under the ITAT Rules, 1963, are annexed with this appeal. Further, from the perusal of the Form No. – 36 filed by the assessee, we find that the date of service of communication of the impugned order is Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 452/VIZ/2024 Ramu Musunuri Page No. 2 22.08.2024, and the assessee filed the appeal on 31.10.2024. Thus, it appears to have been filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. However, the assessee has not filed any application seeking condonation of the delay. Furthermore, the assessee has also not filed the challan, which evidences the payment of appeal filing fees, before the Tribunal. Therefore, in sum and substance, it is evident that the assessee neither took any steps to cure the defects as notified by the Registry nor filed any application seeking condonation of the apparent delay in filing the present appeal. 2. From the perusal of the record, we further find that this appeal was listed for hearing on 10 occasions previously; despite this fact, the assessee did not take any steps to cure the aforesaid defects. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the present appeal in the present form is defective and, therefore, is liable to be dismissed. We order accordingly. 3. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th September, 2025. Sd/- (एस बालाक ृष्णन) (S. BALAKRISHNAN) लेखा सदस्य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (संदीप धसंह करहेल) (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated :19.09.2025 Giridhar, Sr.PS Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 452/VIZ/2024 Ramu Musunuri Page No. 3 आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/ The Assessee : Ramu Musunuri Rangapuram Lingapalem Mandal West Godavari - 534462 2. रधजस्व / The Revenue : Income Tax Officer 23-B-4-6/4 Income Tax Office KKS Towers, R.R.Pet Eluru – 534002 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 4. नवभधगीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, नवशधखधपटणम /DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6. गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file //True Copy// आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam Printed from counselvise.com "