Market Committee, Chhachrauli V. DCIT, Yamunanagar

ITA 135/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7490 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 135/CHD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-08) MARKET COMMITTEE, VS. THE DCIT, CHHACHRAULI. YAMUNA NAGAR PAN NO. AAALM0308B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 25.06.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.07.2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSA ILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2017 OF CIT(A), KARNA L PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2006-07 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. IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. 3. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING I.E . 23.05.2018, THE ASSESSEE WAS REPRESENTED BY A COUNSEL SHRI NEERAJ YADAV, C.A. WHO WAS GIVEN TIME TO REVISE THE GROUNDS IF NEED BE AS THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL DID NOT BRING OUT THE GRIEVANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE. IT IS SEEN THAT DESPITE THIS ORDER-SHEET ENTRY DATED 3.05.201 8 WHEREBY THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 25.06.2018, THE ASSESSEE HAS RE MAINED UNREPRESENTED TILL DATE. IN THIS PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES, IT MAY BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIO US IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED AS NEITHER THE GROUNDS HAVE BEEN REVISED NOR ANYONE H AS PUT IN APPEARANCE. SUPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELH I BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. ITA 135/CHD/2018 A.Y.2006-07 PAGE 2 OF 2 4. 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 LIBER TY 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. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.07. 2018. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA S INGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 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.