M/s Shree Balaji Woollen Mills, Panipat V. ACIT, Panipat

ITA 1239/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3930 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 26-11-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y K KAKKAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH I: NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.K. HALDAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NOS.1238 & 1239/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. SHREE BALAJI WOOLLEN MILLS, ASSTT. COMMISSION ER OF INCOME-TAX, KABRI ROAD, PANIPATL. VS. PANIPAT CIRCLE, PANIPAT . PAN: AADFS8238B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MS. Y.K. KAKKAR, S R. DR O R D E R PER DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 4.7.2008 AND 17.12.2010 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), KARNAL, PERTAINING TO THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. ONE APPEAL IS IN REGARD TO THE QUANTUM OF ADDITION AND THE OTHER IS IN REGARD TO THE PENALTY BEING SUSTAINED BY THE CIT(A). HOWE VER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSE E. THE APPEALS WERE PASSED OVER. EVEN IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS PL ACED BEFORE THE BENCH. 2 2. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE DATE OF H EARING WAS INTIMATED TO THE ASSESSEE BY SENDING NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ADDRESS INDICATED BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO.10 OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEA L IN FORM NO.36. DESPITE THE SAME, NEITHER ANYONE WAS PRESENT ON BEH ALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN THE PROSECUTION O F THESE APPEALS. MS. Y.K. KAKKAR, SR. DR APPEARED FOR THE REVENUE. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PR OVISIONS OF ORDER V RULE 19A OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES , AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASES OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 3 8 ITD 320 (DEL); AND LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR, 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE DISMISS THE SE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FRE E TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NON- COMPLIANCE ETC. AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED AB OUT THE REASONS ETC., THEN THIS ORDER SHALL BE RECALLED. 4. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT O N THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF I.E. ON 2 ND JUNE, 2011. SD/- SD/- (B.K. HALDAR) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2 ND JUNE, 2011. 3 ITA NOS.1238 & 1239/DEL/2011 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.