Sh. Pawan Garg, Ludhiana V. ACIT, C-2, Ludhiana

ITA 1475/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9916 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARJINDER SINGH CIT

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC CHANDIGARH !', # BE FORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM ./ ITA NO. 1475/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SHRI PAWAN GARG, PROP. PAWAN DYEING & FINISHING MILLS, CIRCULAR ROAD, MADHOPURI, LUDHIANA. VS THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2, LUDHIANA. ./ PAN NO: ABKPG4904E / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT ! ' / ASSESSEE BY : NONE # ! ' / REVENUE BY : SHRI HARJINDER SINGH, ADDL.CIT $ % ! &/ DATE OF HEARING : 23.05.2019 '()* ! &/ D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.05.2019 $%/ ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 05.09.2018 OF CIT(A) -I, LUDHIANA PERTAINING TO 2014-15 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. EVEN IN THE SECOND ROUND, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS FILED ON 29.11.2018. THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARIN G ON 26.03.2019. ON THE SAID DATE, IT WAS ADJOURNED ON THE ORAL REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RECORD ALSO SHOWS THAT SIMILARLY, ON 27.03.2019, IT WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS SEEN THAT NOTICE FOR THE SPECIFIC DATE OF HEARING HAS BEEN ISSUED ON 11.04.2019. DESPITE THIS, THE A SSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. IT IS SEEN THAT RIGHT TILL THE PASSI NG OF THE ORDER. NO ITA 1475/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE 2 OF 2 APPLICATION EXPLAINING THE LACK OF REPRESENTATION H AS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEALS THAT T HE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED AND THE APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. SUPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI 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. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABL E CAUSE FOR NON- REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYE R. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.05.2019. SD/- ( !' ) (DIVA SINGH) # / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' ( (+ ! ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. $ / / CIT 4. $ / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 2 , & 2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 15 7% / GUARD FILE (+ $ / BY ORDER, 8 # / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR