Income Tax Appeal Dismissed due to 754-Day Delay & Uncured Incorrect Appeal Fee Payment

Dhanaram Chowdary Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore, dismissed the assessee’s appeal as non-maintainable. The appeal was filed with a delay of 754 days and contained defects, including payment of the appeal fee under the wrong head and failure to pay it under the prescribed category for appeal fees. The Registry’s defects remained unrectified until the date of hearing. The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, and no condonation petition explaining the delay was filed. Observing that the appeal fee had been remitted under the “Tax” head instead of “Others” and that the defects had not been cured, the Tribunal held that the appeal could not be admitted and dismissed it as non-maintainable.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax – Appeals [in short ‘CIT(A)] vide DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057423927(1) dated 26.10.2023 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2. At the outset, it was noticed that appeal was filed with the following defects:

1. Appeal is time-barred by 754 days.

2. (EF) Appeal fees paid under incorrect head (Should be under NEW Minor Head: Other Receipts (500), Sub-Type of Payment: Appeal Fees OR Old Minor Head: Self Assessment Tax (300), Breakup: F. Others).

3. Appeal fee not filed as Others in details of payment, which is not treated as appeal fees.

3. None appeared for the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative [in short ‘DR’]relied on the orders of the Revenue authorities.

4. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the appeal was filed with a defect which remains not rectified till the date of hearing. There was non-appearance by the learned Authorized Representative [in short ‘AR’] also to explain the reasons for the delay. It is also noted that the appeal fees is remitted under ‘Tax’ head instead of ‘Others’. In these circumstances, we find that the appeal could not be admitted and not maintainable since the assessee has not cured the defects pointed out by the Registry and no condonation petition has been filed by the assessee explaining the reasons for the delay of 754 days. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee as non-maintainable.

5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.