M. Shanmugam v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Central I, Chennai
[Citation -2016-LL-0930-192]

Citation 2016-LL-0930-192
Appellant Name M. Shanmugam
Respondent Name The Commissioner of Income-tax, Central I, Chennai
Court ITAT-Chennai
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 30/09/2016
Assessment Year 2007-08
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags information technology
Bot Summary: At the time of hearing, none appeared and we found that there is a delay of 498 days in filing the appeal and the reasons for delay was not properly explained in the condonation petition and further defect memo was issued on 14.10.2015 for submission of copy of assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act and Form 35 with statement of facts, grounds of appeal before ld. Till today, there is no compliance to defective notice issued by the Tribunal. Since the appeal is defective and could not be adjudicated. In these circumstances, as held by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Limited 38 ITD 320 that there may be various reasons for the assessee to remain absent at the time of hearing and one of the reasons might be absence to prosecute the appeal and also following decision of the Co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited vs ITO in ITA No.134/Mds/2011, dated 05.07.2011, we hereby dismiss the appeal in limine. We make it clear that the assessee is at liberty to file a petition to recall this order provided convincing/sufficient cause be explained with :- 3 -: ITA No.1832/Mds/2015 rectification of defects as per defective notice issued and also for non appearance on the said date of hearing. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1832/Mds/2015 is dismissed Order pronounced on Friday, the 30th day of September, 2016, at Chennai.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T.A. No. 1832/Mds/2015 /Assessment year : 2007-2008. Shri. M. Shanmugam, Commissioner of Income Sarvesh Villa, Plot B, Vs. Tax, Navaneetham Nagar, Central I, 4th Street, Chennai. Bagyam Nagar Extn. Chennai 600 073. [PAN APAPS 9832F] ( /Appellant) ( /Respondent) / Appellant by : None /Respondent by : Shri. R. Durai Pandian, IRS, JCIT. /Date of Hearing : 29-09-2016 /Date of Pronouncement : 30-09-2016 / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: appeal filed by assessee is directed against order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai in ITA No.146/553/14-15, dated 24.2.2014 for assessment year 2007- :- 2 -: ITA No.1832/Mds/2015 2008 passed u/s.143(3) and 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as Act ). 2. At time of hearing, none appeared and we found that there is delay of 498 days in filing appeal and reasons for delay was not properly explained in condonation petition and further defect memo was issued on 14.10.2015 for submission of copy of assessment order u/s.143(3) of Act and Form 35 with statement of facts, grounds of appeal before ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Till today, there is no compliance to defective notice issued by Tribunal. Since appeal is defective and could not be adjudicated. In these circumstances, as held by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Limited 38 ITD 320 that there may be various reasons for assessee to remain absent at time of hearing and one of reasons might be absence to prosecute appeal and also following decision of Co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in case of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited vs ITO in ITA No.134/Mds/2011, dated 05.07.2011, we hereby dismiss appeal in limine. However, we make it clear that assessee is at liberty to file petition to recall this order provided convincing/sufficient cause be explained with :- 3 -: ITA No.1832/Mds/2015 rectification of defects as per defective notice issued and also for non appearance on said date of hearing. 3. In result, appeal of assessee in ITA No.1832/Mds/2015 is dismissed Order pronounced on Friday, 30th day of September, 2016, at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- ( ) ( . ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /Chennai /Dated:30.09.2016 KV /Copy to: 1. /Appellant 3. ( )/CIT(A) 5. /DR 2. /Respondent 4. /CIT 6. /GF M. Shanmugam v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central I, Chennai
Report Error