M/s Shri Vaish Aggarwal Panchyat, Kurukshetra V. CIT,(E), Chandigarh

ITA 1585/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0653 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-12-2018
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARVESH JOHRII
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH B , CHANDIGARH , !'# , #$ % & ' ( , )*' BEFORE: SMT.DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A M ./ ITA NO.1585/CHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016-17 M/S SHRI VAISH AGGARWAL PANCHYAT, KURUKSHETRA. THE C.I.T. (E), CHANDIGARH. ./PAN NO: AAJTS3498K /ASSESSEE BY : NONE / REVENUE BY : SHRI PARVESH JOHRII, CIT DR ! /DATE OF HEARING : 04.12.2018 '#$% /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04.12.2018 )+ /ORDER PER ANNAPURNA, AM : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH (IN SHORT CIT(E) DATED 2 9.9.2017 PASSED U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX AT, 1961 (HEREINA FTER REFERRED TO AS ACT). 2. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 19.7.2018 AND THE SAME WAS ADJOURNED TO 25.7.2018 A ND AGAIN FOR TODAY I.E. 4.12.2018. HOWEVER, ON THE AP POINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 4.12.2018 NONE APPEARED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTE RESTED ITA NO.1020/CHD/2017 A.Y.2013-14 2 IN PURSUING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACH ARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGE S 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO :- I) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FO R NON- PROSECUTION. 6. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECAL L OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.12.2018. SD/- SD/- $ %' & ( (DIVA SINGH) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ,' / JUDICIAL MEMBER )*' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ /DATED: 4 TH DECEMBER, 2018 * * ITA NO.1020/CHD/2017 A.Y.2013-14 3 #&' ()*) / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. + / THE APPELLANT 2. ',+ / THE RESPONDENT 3. - ! / CIT 4. - ! ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. )./' 0 , 0 , 123/4 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. /35 / GUARD FILE #& ! / BY ORDER, 6 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR