M/s Swati Industries, Ludhiana V. DCIT, C-1, Ludhiana

ITA 1225/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5152 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHB, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1225/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SWATI INDUSTRIES VS. THE DCIT D-74, PHASE-V CIRCLE-1, RISHI NAGAR FOCAL POINT LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN NO. AADFS5870M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. MANJIT SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 21/03/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22/03/2018 ORDER PER B.R.R. KUMAR A.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-2, LUDHIANA DT. 05/05/2017. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUE ST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. 2. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE ON 11/08/2017. IT CAME UP FOR HEARING FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 07/12/2017. ON THE SAID DATE, IT WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE COUNSELS REPRESENTATIVE TO 21.03.2 018. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE OF HE ARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. EVEN NO APPLICATION 2 SEEKING ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUME D 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) 3 8 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUK OJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN T HE EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRES ENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A 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 DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (B.R.R.KUM AR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 22/03/2018 AG COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT, TH E CIT(A), THE DR