M/s Surya Synthetics, Ludhiana V. ITO, W-3(3), Ludhiana

ITA 1224/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6591 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO 1224/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 M/S SURYA SYNTHETICS, VS THE ITO, RAHON ROAD, WARD 3(3), LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN NO. AASFS9396P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDER KANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 07.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.11.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSA ILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 30.05.2017 OF LD. CIT (APP EALS) LUDHIANA PERTAINING TO 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. DESPITE THIS, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPR ESENTED. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT DEFECTS IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 08.09.2017 WHICH, TILL DATE HAS REMAINED NOT CU RED. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT NOTICE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED P OST AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN COLUMN NO.10 IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED HAS CO ME BACK UNSERVED. ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE SAME IT CAN BE SAFEL Y PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. S UPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS M ULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRAD ESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX C OMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EV ENTUALITY 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 LIBE RTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER AND GIVING AN UNDERTAKING TO ITA 1224/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2010-11 PAGE 2 OF 2 CURE THE DEFECT POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOU NCED 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 13 TH NOVEMBER,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.