2017 (5) TMI 1103 - AT - Income Tax

Time barred appeal - maintainability of appeal - assessment order sent through speed post - reasons for delay - Held that - There is no denial of assessee through any evidence that the assessment order was not served upon him in the year 2002. The assessee also produced copy of the GPA executed in favour of his brother who was residing at the same address of the assessee whereby he was authorized to file appeals, application etc. The Assessing Officer also confirmed in his report to the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessment order sent through speed post cover was not received back unserved by the Income Tax Department. These facts therefore clearly prove that the assessment order was validly served upon to the assessee through speed post in the year 2002. Thus the appeal was clearly time barred by 10 years 1 month and 18 days. The assessee did not file any application for condonation of delay and no sufficient material was produced before Ld. CIT(A) to explain delay in filing the appeal to the satisfaction of the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) was therefore justified in holding that appeal of assessee is time barred and is not maintainable. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues: Time-barred appeal

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appeal by the assessee was directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) XX New Delhi dated 27.11.2014 for assessment year 1996-97. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, holding it to be time-barred by 10 years, 1 month, and 18 days.

2. The assessment in this case was completed on a total income of ?40,39,670/- on 30th March 1991. The Tribunal set aside the main issue of addition of ?35,50,000/- on account of cash credits. The Assessing Officer issued statutory notices, but the assessee did not comply, leading to an ex parte assessment order dated 27th March 2002. The income was computed at ?39,80,780/-.

3. The assessee filed the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on 18th June 2012. However, there was a contradiction in the date of service as per the claim of the assessee and the demand notice/speed post receipt. The assessee failed to produce relevant documents, such as a passport, to prove non-receipt of the assessment order.

4. Ld. CIT(A) noted that the assessee's claim of not being in India since 1998 was contradicted by attendance in assessment proceedings for the year 1998-99. The assessee also failed to prove non-receipt of the assessment order. The appeal was held time-barred due to a lack of application for condonation of delay.

5. The assessee's counsel attended assessment proceedings, indicating awareness of the case. The counsel's appearance before the Assessing Officer suggested the assessee's knowledge of the proceedings. The plea of being away from India was not substantiated with evidence, and the appeal was dismissed as time-barred by 10 years, 1 month, and 18 days.

6. The appeal was justified to be time-barred as the assessee did not file any application for condonation of delay, and no sufficient material was produced to explain the delay in filing the appeal. The assessment order was validly served via speed post, and no interference was warranted. The appeal was dismissed accordingly.