Latest Expert Exchange Queries

Make your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
Popular Search: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: VAT Audit :: form 3cd :: TDS :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: cpt :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: due date for vat payment :: VAT RATES :: empanelment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD
From the Courts »
 New Delhi Television Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
 John Fowler (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
 CIT vs. The Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Iron and Steel Market Committee (Bombay High Court)
 KSS Petron Private Ltd vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 JK Mittal & Co vs. UOI (No. 2) (Delhi High Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Shri Mahila Sewa Sahakari Bank Ltd (Gujarat High Court)
 Pr CIT Vs. PPC Business And Products Pvt Ltd (Delhi High Court)
 Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-Iii Vs. M/s. Radico Khaitan Ltd.
 Mastech Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-3 Vs. Surya Vinayak Industires Ltd.
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-3 Vs. J.H. Business India Pvt. Ltd.

M/s. Blue Bird Forex Services P. Ltd. 7, Swastika Plaza, Next to Kalaniketan, V.M. Road Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400049 Vs. Income Tax Officer- 8(1)(2) Mumbai
September, 11th 2014
                          "SMC" Bench, Mumbai

                 Before Shri D. Manmohan, Vice President

                          ITA No. 2572/Mum/2013
                          (Assessment Year: 2007-08)

  M/s. Blue Bird Forex Services P. Ltd.     Income Tax Officer- 8(1)(2)
  7, Swastika Plaza, Next to                Mumbai
  Kalaniketan, V.M. Road
  Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400049
                             PAN - AACCB0803H
                 Appellant                        Respondent

                     Appellant by:    None
                     Respondent by:   Shri Neil Philip

                     Date of Hearing:       10.09.2014
                     Date of Pronouncement: 10.09.2014


Per D. Manmohan, V.P.

     This appeal, by the assessee company, is directed against the order
passed by the CIT(A)- 16, Mumbai and it pertains to AY 2007-08.

2.    Though notice was sent to the assessee by RPAD, none appeared on
behalf of the assessee. I, therefore, proceed to dispose of this appeal exparte,
qua assessee.

3.    At the time of hearing the learned D.R. pointed out that there is a
delay of 50 days in filing the appeal and the assessee has not furnished any
explanation. In other words, sufficient cause is not explained for the delay in
filing the appeal. He also submitted that there was a delay of 68 days even
before the CIT(A).

4.    I have carefully verified the record. The Registry has sent a defect
memo wherein it was stated that the appeal is time barred by 50 days with a
direction to file an affidavit and a petition for condonation of delay whereas
the assessee merely filed a letter dated 03.04.2013 wherein it is stated that
there is a slight delay of 35 days and, without furnishing any reasons, a
                                      2                   ITA No. 2572/Mum/2013
                                                M/s. Blue Bird Forex Services P. Ltd.

request was made to condone the delay. In the absence of any specific
reason I am unable to appreciate the contention of the assessee. The Apex
Court, in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors 167
ITR 471, observed that pedantic approach should not be taken in the matter
of consideration of explanation for delay in filing appeals but there should be
sufficient cause and the assessee has to properly explain the reasons for the
delay. In the instant case, admittedly, assessee has not furnished any
reason for the delay of 50 days. Under these circumstances I dismiss the
appeal as unadmitted on the ground that the appeal is barred by limitation.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10th September, 2014.

                                                    (D. Manmohan)
                                                     Vice President

Mumbai, Dated: 10th September, 2014

Copy to:

   1.   The   Appellant
   2.   The   Respondent
   3.   The   CIT(A) ­ 16, Mumbai
   4.   The   CIT­ 8, Mumbai City
   5.   The   DR, "SMC" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai

                                                      By Order

//True Copy//
                                                  Assistant Registrar
                                          ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Multi-level Marketing MLM India Affiliate Marketing Affiliate Marketing Software MLM Software MLM Solutions Multi level marketing solutions MLM Servi

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions