Sh. Parminder Singh Mavi, Morinda V. ITO, Ropar

ITA 1014/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5219 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 22-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGHDR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1015 & 1014/CHD/2014 ASSESSMEN T YEAR: 2008-09 SHRI PARMINDER SINGH MAVI, VS. THE ITO, NEAR MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, WARD 2(4), MORINDA. ROPAR. PAN NO. CROPS4461G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH,DR DATE OF HEARING : 28.03.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.04.2017 ORDER PER MS. DIVA SINGH,JM BOTH THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 01/10/2014 OF CIT (A) CHANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 2008 09 ASSESSMENT YEAR. CHALLENGE IS POSED TO THE ORDE RS WHEREIN THE PENALTIES IMPOSED UNDER SECTION 271 (1) (C) AND 271 (1) (B) OF THE IN COME TAX ACT HAVE BEEN UPHELD BY THE CIT (APPEALS). AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJO URNMENT APPLICATION WAS MOVED BY THE LD. AR STATING THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN HE ARD IN ANOTHER CASE ON 6 JANUARY,2017 AND THE ORDER IS AWAITED, ACCORDINGLY TIME WAS SOUGHT. HOWEVER THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT A DE FECT ON 19/11/2014 I.E. THE DATE OF FILING THE APPEALS ITSELF AND THE APPEALS HAVE COME UP FOR HEARING ON MORE THAN HALF A DOZEN TIMES AND HAVE BEEN ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, DESPITE THIS THE DEFECT REMAINED. TILL DATE, NEITHER THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL HAVE BEEN SIGNED BY THE ASSESSEE NOR HAS THE VERIFICATION BEEN SIGNED BY TH E ASSESSEE. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES HOLDING THE APPEAL S TO BE DEFECTIVE WHEREIN DESPITE MORE THAN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY THE ASSESSEE HAS N OT CARED TO CURE THE DEFECT, THE SAME ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. THE ADJOURNMENT APPL ICATION, ACCORDINGLY, WAS REJECTED. 2 AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY UNDERTAKING TO CURE THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 2. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISM ISSED IN LIMINE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH APRIL, 2017. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA S INGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 5 TH APRIL, 2017. POONAM/DNS COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.