M/s Rasandik Enginnering Industries India Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1158/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 115820114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S.KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-1158/DEL/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) RASANDIK ENGINEERS INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD, C-4 &5, FIRST FLOOR, C-BLOCK, COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, PASCHIMI MARG, VASANT VIHAR, NEW DLEHI-100057 PAN-AAACR3381A (APPELLANT) VS ACIT, LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: MS. MEENAKSHI VOHRA, SR. DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 10.12.2012 OF CIT(A), LTU, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2009-10 AS SESSMENT YEAR. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO THE POSI TION REMAINED THE SAME. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON 29.08.2013 ALSO WHEN THE APPEA L WAS LISTED FOR HEARING THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. CONSEQUENTLY THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO-10 IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RECORD SHOWS THA T IT WAS ISSUED ON 15.12.2013 FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 11.02.2014. ACCORDIN GLY, IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SER IOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND THE ASSESSEES NON- REPRESENTATION IN THE BACKGROUND DISCUSSED CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES THAT THE ASSESSEE I.T.A .NO.-1158/DEL/2013 2 IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. AC CORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE ORDER OF THE T RIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 32 0 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). IN TH E SAID CASE WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THE HONBLE COURT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS IN THEIR ORDER- IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION O F THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT B OUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 2. WE HASTEN TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING THEN IT MAY IF SO ADVISED PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND DECISIO NS ON MERITS. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH OF MARCH 2014. SD/- SD/- (T.S.KAPOOR) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 11/03/2014 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI