M/s. Krishna Enterprises, Haryana V. ITO, Panipat

ITA 1071/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7604 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 03-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH.L.P.SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-1071/DE L/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011- 12) KRISHNA ENTERPRISES, 13, GANESH NAGAR, OPP. CHANDNI BAGH POLICE STATION, SANOLI ROAD, PANIPAT, HARYANA-132103. PAN-AAGFK9720R (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-5, PANIPAT. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH . MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 03 .0 5 .2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09 .0 6 .2016 O R D E R PER SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAIL ING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 02.12.2015 OF CIT(A), KARNAL PERTAI NING TO 2011-12 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF H EARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. IN THE THIRD ROUND ALSO, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. THE RECORD S HOWS THAT THE NOTICE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN COLUMN NO. 10 IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL HAS COME BACK UNSERVED/PATA ADHURA. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE DEFECT NOTICE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY ON 14.03.2016 ALSO RE MAINS NOT ADDRESSED. 2. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY ADJOURNMENT RIGHT UPTO THE DATE OF PASSING OF THE ORDER, IT IS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE TO DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE AS THE APPEAL I.T.A .NO.-1071/DE L/2016 PAGE 2 OF 2 FILED IS DEFECTIVE. IN THE AFORE-MENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES OF THE CASE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PETITI ON SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUI NG THE APPEAL. LIBERTY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER, IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL BY ATTEMPTING TO TAK E APPROPRIATE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS. IN SUCH AN EVENTUALITY, THE CO-ORDINATE B ENCH CONSIDERING THE PETITION IF SO MOVED, IF SO SATISFIED THAT THE DEFECTS HAVE BEE N CURED MAY RECALL THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED IN LIMINE. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 OF JUNE, 2016. SD/- SD/- (L.P.SAHU) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSIS TANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI