M/S FIRDOUS DEVELOPERS & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY , KASHMIR V. INCOME TAX OFICER -WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

ITA 163/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4970 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 15-05-2019
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARWIND ER KAUR LD

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AM RITSAR BEFORE SH. N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.163(ASR)/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:200 9-10 M/S FIRDOUS DEVELOPERS & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, AHANGER HOUSE, OLD GAGRIBAL ROAD SRINAGAR, KASHMIR [PAN:AABFF5523E] VS. THE ITO WARD-3(1) SRINAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SMT. PARWINDER KAUR (LD. CIT-DR) DATE OF HEARING: 15.05.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20.05.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DT . 20/01/2017 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) JAMMU AND KASHMIR (J&K) UNDER SECTION 250(6) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS T HE ACT) WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON P ROSECUTION. 2 . THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3 . AT THE TIME OF HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO NOT FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. A S ITS APPEARS FROM THE FILE THAT APPEAL IS ALSO DEFECTIVE AND NOTICE OF DE FECT HAS DULY BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THE NOTICE OF HEARING FO R TODAY I.E; 15/05/2019 HAS ALREADY BEEN ISSUED ON 04/05/2019 BUT T HE SAME 2 ITA NO.163(ASR)/2018 M/S FIRDOUS DEVELOPERS & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY VS. ITO REMAINS UNATTENDED. FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE IT SE EMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTING IN PROSECUTION OF THE INSTANT A PPEAL. IT ALSO APPEARS FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE SAID ORDER H AS ALREADY BEEN PASSED ON NON PROSECUTION. HENCE, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSE E WE DO NOT HAVE ANY OPTION EXCEPT TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963, AS WAS CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD, REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320(DEL.), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL A S UNADMITTED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTI ON. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO SEEK RECALL OF THIS ORD ER BY SHOWING SUFFICIENT AND BONAFIDE CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE AND NO T CURING THE DEFECT, AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS, ETC., IT CAN RECALL THE ABOVE ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.05.2019 SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 20.05.2019 AG, CHD(ON TOUR) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE (2) THE ITO, WARD-3(1) (3) THE CIT(A)-, JAMMU & KASHMIR (J&K) (4) THE CIT CONCERNED (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., AMRITSAR TRUE COPY BY ORDER