Smt. Pravesh Parasbhai Bafna, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT, Circle-9, Ahmedabad

ITA 1179/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5897 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH BEFORE: SHRI S.S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SMT. PRAVESH PARASBHAI BAFNA (PROP. OF BAFNA ROADLINES) 6, SARDAR PATEL ESTATE, OPP. VATVA TRAINING SCHOOL, NAROL, AHMEDABAD PAN: AAYPB0123D (APPELLANT) VS THE DCIT, CIRCLE - 9, AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) SRI KAPIL PARAS BHAI BAFNA (PROP. OF M/S. KAPIL ROADLINES), 6, SARDAR PATEL ESTATE, OPP. VATVA TRAINING SCHOOL, NAROL, AHMEDABAD PAN: ABRPB0197M (APPELLANT) VS THE DCIT, CIRCLE - 9, AHMEDAB AD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI PRASOON KABRA , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 2 8 - 02 - 2 018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 - 03 - 2 018 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : - I T A NO . 1179 / A HD/20 15 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 ITA NO. 1180 /AHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 I.T.A NO S . 1179 TO 1180 /AHD/2015 A.Y. 201 0 - 11 PAGE NO SMT. PRAVESH PARASBHAI BAFNA & SRI KAPIL PARASBHAI BAFNA VS. DCIT 2 THESE TWO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES APPEAL S FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 , AR ISE FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 3 , AHMEDABAD DATED 09 - 02 - 2015 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF BOTH THE ASSESSEES. LAST NOTICE DATED 11/09/2017OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEES FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 28/02/2018 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO. 10. DESPITE THIS, THE ASSESSEE S REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEES ARE NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THEIR APPEALS FILED. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEALS OF BOTH THE ASSESSEES IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA VS. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.). 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE S ARE ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON - REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO AD VISED TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE S ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 12 - 03 - 201 8 SD/ - SD/ - ( S.S. GODARA ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO S . 1179 TO 1180 /AHD/2015 A.Y. 201 0 - 11 PAGE NO SMT. PRAVESH PARASBHAI BAFNA & SRI KAPIL PARASBHAI BAFNA VS. DCIT 3 AHMEDABAD : DATED 12 /03/2018 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,