Kohinoor Cargo & Industrial Park Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Unsigned Appeal Is No Appeal: ITAT Mumbai Dismisses Case in Limine but Keeps Recall Door Open
Mumbai ITAT dismissed the appeal in limine due to fundamental defects in filing. The Tribunal noted that Form 36 and the grounds of appeal were neither signed nor verified by the assessee, despite multiple defect notices issued by the Registry and adjournments granted by the Tribunal.
Holding that signing and verification go to the very foundation of a valid appeal, the ITAT observed that an unsigned appeal is as good as no appeal in the eyes of law and cannot be taken up for adjudication. However, taking a balanced approach, the Tribunal granted liberty to the assessee to cure the defects and seek recall of the order, if it is serious about prosecuting the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, with recall liberty expressly preserved.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 21-06-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14.
2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor was any adjournment application filed. Further, it is noted that there is a defect in filing the present appeal, wherein the appeal Form No.36 and grounds of appeal have not been signed and verified by the assessee. In this regard, it is noted that the Registry has issued a defect notice on 02-09-2025 and the assessee was advised to rectify the defect within ten days from the receipt of the notice. However, there was no compliance to the notice and the matter was listed for hearing on 09-10-2025 and there again, it is noted from the record that the assessee has not rectified the defect and the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal had adjourned the matter to remove the defects in the appeal and the matter was adjourned for 28th October, 2025 and it has now come up for hearing on 10-12-2025 before us and we again find that there is no compliance to the notice issued by the Registry and the directions issued by the Coordinate Bench on the earlier occasions and the defects in the appeal have still not been removed.
