M/s Gorsi Constructions Pvt. Ltd. , Mandi V. ACIT, Circle, Mandi

ITA 1175/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6610 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1175/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S GORSI CONSTRUCTIONS P.LTD., VS. THE ACIT, VILLAGE TAKOLI, PO-PANARASSA, MANDI (HP). TEHSIL AUTT, DISTT. MANDI (HP). PAN NO. AABCG4994K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 31.10.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.11. 2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2017 OF LD. CIT (APPE ALS) PALAMPUR PERTAINING TO 2005-06 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. DESPITE THIS , NEITHER THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NOTICE DATED 12.10.2017 FO R THE SPECIFIC DATE OF HEARING HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE LOCAL A DDRESS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO. 10 OF ITS MEMO OF APPEAL FILED WHIC H HAS NOT COME BACK UNSERVED. ACCORDINGLY, SERVICE IS DEEMED TO B E COMPLETE. IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IT CAN BE S AFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. SUPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'B LE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO H OLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVE NTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE C AUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO P RAY FOR A ITA 1175/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2005-06 PAGE 2 OF 2 RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.11. 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.