R. Venugopal v. ITO, Ward-1(3), Belgaum
[Citation -2016-LL-0916-5]

Citation 2016-LL-0916-5
Appellant Name R. Venugopal
Respondent Name ITO, Ward-1(3), Belgaum
Court ITAT-Panaji
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 16/09/2016
Assessment Year 2004-05
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags condonation of delay • mistake apparent
Bot Summary: Application filed by the assessee against the order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. None represented on behalf of the assessee and there is no adjournment application also. It was submitted by the Departmental Representative that the appeal of the assessee had been dismissed on account of non-payment of appeal fee 10,000/- under the head self assessment tax , and also on the ground that the delay in filing the appeal had not been explained. Application, the assessee 2 MA No. 05 06/PAN/2016 is submitting that the application for condonation of delay and challan of payment of appeal fee, which cannot make the order of the Tribunal erroneous. The subsequent act of the assessee for filing the petition for condonation of delay would not amount to a mistake apparent from the record in the order of the Tribunal. As no error has been pointed in the order of the Tribunal, the Misc. Order Pronounced in the Court at the close of the hearing on Friday, the 16th day of September, 2016 at Goa.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, HON BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.Nos. 05 & 06/PAN/2016 (ITA Nos. 370 & 371/PNJ/2014) (Asst. Years : 2004-05 & 2005-06) R. Venugopal, Vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Hotel Ashok, Sy No.66/1, Solapur Belgaum. Road, Opp. BLDE New Campus, Vijayapur. PAN No. AISPR 5657 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department By : Shri Ramesh S. Mutagar - DR Date of hearing : 16/09/2016. Date of pronouncement : 16/09/2016. ORDER PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is Misc. Application filed by assessee against order of Tribunal in ITA Nos. 370 & 371/PNJ/2014, dated 22/01/2015. 2. None represented on behalf of assessee and there is no adjournment application also. Shri Ramesh S. Mutagar, Departmental Representative represented on behalf of Revenue. 3. It was submitted by Departmental Representative that appeal of assessee had been dismissed on account of non-payment of appeal fee 10,000/- under head self assessment tax , and also on ground that delay in filing appeal had not been explained. It was submission that in Misc. Application, assessee 2 MA No. 05 & 06/PAN/2016 is submitting that application for condonation of delay and challan of payment of appeal fee, which cannot make order of Tribunal erroneous. It was submission that Misc. Application is liable to be dismissed. 4. We have considered submissions and perused Misc. Application. subsequent act of assessee for filing petition for condonation of delay would not amount to mistake apparent from record in order of Tribunal. Consequently, as no error has been pointed in order of Tribunal, Misc. Application filed by assessee stands dismissed. 5. In result, Misc. Application filed by assessee stands dismissed. Order Pronounced in Court at close of hearing on Friday, 16th day of September, 2016 at Goa. Sd/- sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (N.S.SAINI) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated : 16 t h September , 2016. vr/- Copy to : 1. Assessee. R. Venugopal, Hotel Ashok, Sy No.66/1, Solapur Road, Opp. BLDE New Campus, Vijayapur.. 2. Revenue . ITO, Ward-1(3), Belgaum. 3. CIT , Belgaum. 4. CIT (A), Belgaum. 5. D.R. 6. Guard file . By order Assistant Registrar I.T.A.T., Panaji R. Venugopal v. ITO, Ward-1(3), Belgaum
Report Error