" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 138/Ahd/2024 (in I.T.A. No. 1029/Ahd/2018) Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Bhartiben S. Patel C/o. K. K. Shah C-302, Shashvat Flat, Near Gada Circle, Harni, Vadodara - 390022 बनाम/ Vs. The DCIT International Taxation, Vadodara èथायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AWEPP3864H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथȸ ओर से /Appellant by : None Ĥ×यथȸ कȧ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 30/04/2025 O R D E R The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee, seeking rectification in the order passed by the ITAT in appeal in ITA No. 1029/Ahd/2018 dated 29.11.2022. 2. The Registry has noted the Miscellaneous Application to be delayed in filing by 533 days. The order of the ITAT in which the present rectification application lies was passed on 29.11.2022, and while section 254(2) of the Act mandates rectification of orders to be done within 6 months from the date MA No. 138/Ahd/2024 [Smt. Bhartiben S. Patel vs. DCIT (Intl. Taxation] A.Y. 2011-12 - 2 – of passing of the order, the assessee has filed its present application on 14-11-2024 with a delay of 533 days. 3. Clearly the impugned application is barred by limitation and there is no case therefore for entertaining the same. 4. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Malvinder Singh vs UOI (2005)278 ITR 568 (P&H) has categorically held that an application for rectification of mistake in an order passed by the Tribunal has to be within the prescribed time and not any time. 5. The Hon’ble Karnataka High reiterated the proposition in the case of Muninaga Reddy Vs ACIT in W.P No.25553/2018 (T- IT) dated12- 07-2018 and went on to further hold that the ITAT has no power to condone the delay in filing of such applications. 6. Moreover despite the application being listed for hearing on 10 occasions, the hearing could never take place since either the Ld.Counsel for the assessee sought adjournment or the Bench did not function. As a matter of fact the impugned order of the ITAT is that passed in second round after recall of the earlier order. And both the orders passed are ex parte noting no compliance by the assessee to various notices issued for hearing. Even in the present application, the assessee has either sought adjournment or not come present before us. The assesse it appears is a habitual offender of the process of law and deserves therefore also no liberty. MA No. 138/Ahd/2024 [Smt. Bhartiben S. Patel vs. DCIT (Intl. Taxation] A.Y. 2011-12 - 3 – 7. In view of the same, the present Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed as non-maintainable on account of the delay in filing of the same by 533 days. 8. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced on 30/04/2025 Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 30/04/2025 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. संबंͬधत आयकर आयुÈत / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुÈत(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड[ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad "