Peri (India ) P.Ltd, Mumbai JT CIT (OSD) CIR -13(1)(2), Mumbai

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND
SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

ITA No. 3181& 4608/MUM/2019
Assessment Year: 2012-13

Peri (India) Private Limited,
1406, DLH Park, S.V. Road,
Goregaon West,
Mumbai-400062.
PAN No. AAECP 4115 E
Appellant 

Vs.

Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(OSD), Circle-13(1)(2),
Room No. 218, 2nd floor, Aayakar
Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road,
Mumbai-400020.
Respondent

ITA No. 3182 & 4607/MUM/2019
Assessment Year: 2013-14

Peri (India) Private Limited,
1406, DLH Park, S.V. Road,
Goregaon West,
Mumbai-400062.
PAN No. AAECP 4115 E
Appellant 

Vs.

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle-13(1)(2),
Room No. 218, 2nd floor, Aayakar
Bhavan,
Mumbai-400020.
Respondent

Assessee by : Mr. M.P. Lohia, AR
Revenue by : Mr. Sushil Mishra, DR

Date of Hearing : 25/01/2021
Date of pronouncement : 05/03/2021

ORDER

PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M.

The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orderof the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-57, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arise out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.144C(3)of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’). As common issues are involved, we are proceeding to dispose off these appeals by a common order for the sake of convenience.

ITA No. 4608/MUM/2019
Assessment Year: 2012-13

2. For AY 2012-13, the assessee had filed Form No. 36 (ITA No. 3181/M/2019) on 13.05.2019. It had also filed Form No. 36 (ITA No.4608/M/2019) for the same assessment year on 22.05.2019. The assesseereceived a defect notice dated 11.11.2020 intimating that the appeal is timebarred by 55 days. The assessee submits that the captioned appeal was filedbefore the Tribunal on 13.05.2019; this appeal was filed against the order ofthe Ld. CIT(A) dated 22.02.2019 passed u/s 250 of the Act; however, at thetime of filing of the appeal, the Managing Director was travelling and the other Director being a foreign Director, was not available in India for execution ofthe appeal; hence, the appeal could not be signed by them; hence, the assessee, in order to avoid any delay in filing of the appeal filed the appeal documents as executed by the authorized signatory of the assessee. 

To know more in details find the attachment file