M/s Interglobe International (P) Ltd, Faridabad V. Income Tax Officer, Faridabad

ITA 1316/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1662 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 03-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROBIN RAWAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC - I NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO. - 1316 /DEL/201 5 (ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2004 - 05 ) INTERGLOBE INTERNATIONAL (P.) LTD., B - 327, 328 NEHRU GROUND, FARIDABAD PAN - AABCI1228E (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD - 11(1), FARIDABAD (RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH.ROBIN RAWAL, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 30 .1 2 .201 4 OF CIT(A), FARIDABAD PERTAINING TO 200 4 - 05 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING , NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. DESPITE THAT T HE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME . THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON TWO EARLIER OCCASIONS, ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH REQUEST WAS ACCEPTED ON 30.07.2015 & 06.10.2015. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. IT IS EVEN OTHERWISE SEEN THAT THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED AN D THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT IT CAN BE EXPLAINED. ACCORDINGLY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE 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 HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). DATE OF HEARING 0 3 . 11 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03 . 11 .2015 I.T.A .NO. - 13 1 6 / DEL/201 5 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON - REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING ; AND THE ASSESSEE IS IN A POSITION TO ADDRESS THE DELAY THEN THE ASSESSEE IF SO ADVISED WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND DECISION ON MERIT. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUN CED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. IN THE RES ULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03 RD OF NOVEMBER , 2015. S D / - (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 0 3 /11 /2015 * AMIT KUMAR * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI