M/s. P.M. Enterprise, Ahmedabad V. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1526/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2510 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ADITYA SHUKLA

Judgement Text

, - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 1526/AHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S.P.M. ENTERPRISE 216, ISKON ARCADE NR. LAL BANGLA, C.G. ROAD AHMEDABAD 380 009. PAN : AANFP 1376 M VS DCIT, CIR.1(2) AHMEDABAD. / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : ADITYA SHUKLA, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 07/03/2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 /03/2019 O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER : ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) DATED 18.11.2016 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2013-14. 2. GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS.8,20.380/- WHICH WAS I MPOSED BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 271AAB(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF HEARING NONE HAS CO ME PRESENT. THE APPEAL WAS PRESENTED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY THE ASS ESSEE THROUGH AUTHORIZED PERSON. AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CUM-NOTICE W AS ISSUED AT THE TIME OF RECEIPT OF APPEAL. IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE N OTICE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT APPEAL WAS TIME BARRED BY 143 DAYS. THE ASSES SEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, BUT A LMOST MORE THAN ONE- AND-HALF YEARS HAS EXPIRED AND APPEAL IS ON BOARD S INCE 16.11.2018. NEITHER ASSESSEE APPEARED NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR C ONDONATION OF DELAY ITA NO.1526 /AHD/2017 - 2 - WAS FILED. NO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE REGISTRY. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT NONE HAS APPEARED BEFORE THE L D.CIT(A) ALSO, AND THEREFORE, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY IN A N EXPARTE ORDER. KEEPING IN VIEW ALL THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE OPIN ION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTEREST IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL, HENCE, IT I S DISMISSED FOR THE WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH MARCH, 2019. SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER