M/s Gymkhana Club, Panchkula V. ITO, W-3, Panchkula

ITA 1305/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0739 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA DHAR
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SMT.DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1305/Chd/2018 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Gymkhana Club Sector-6, Panchkula Haryana बनाम The ITO W-3, Panchkula Haryana थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAAAG0115B नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : None राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR स ु नवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing: 16/06/2022 उदघोषणा क तार ख/Date of Pronouncement: 04/07/2022 आदेश/ORDER Per Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Panchkula dated 16/02/2016 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal was filed way back in 2018 and the matter has been scheduled for hearing from time to time however, the matter has been adjourned from time to time for one reason or another without any substantive hearing. It is further noted that the appeal was last fixed for hearing on 27/04/2022 wherein none appeared on behalf of the assessee and notice was issued through RPAD and matter was adjourned to 16/06/2022. Again today when the matter was called up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application was filed. It therefore seems that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal. Further it is also noticed that there is substantial delay of 902 days as noticed by the Registry in filing the present appeal and the delay has not been explained. Further on merit we noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly held that the charging of interest under section 234B is consequential in nature which is 2 mandatorily charged on the assessed income for default in advance tax and there was no amendment or any change in law in any provisions of the Act and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Bangalore Clup (supra) provided the correct position of law which was already existing at the time of filing of return of income. We therefore find that even on merit we do not find any infirmity in the order so passed by the Ld. CIT(A). We therefore dismiss the present appeal due to non prosecution on behalf of the assessee as well as due to the fact that the delay has not been suitably explained and the matter has been rightly decided by the Ld. CIT(A). 3. Before parting, we hereby grant liberty to the assessee to seek a recall of the present order where it gives an undertaking that it is serious in prosecuting the present appeal and also satisfy the Bench regarding the cause for substantial delay in filing the present appeal. In light of aforesaid directions, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 04/07/2022 . Sd/- Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) याय क सद य/Judicial Member लेखा सद य/Accountant Member Dated: 04/07/2022 AG आदेश क % त&ल'प अ*े'षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ+/ The Appellant 2. %,यथ+/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु -त/ CIT 4. आयकर आय ु -त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. 'वभागीय % त न0ध, आयकर अपील य आ0धकरण, च2डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड फाईल/ Guard File