PAT Mercantile & Finance Co. (P) Ltd., Ghaziabad V. ACIT, Meerut

ITA 1828/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 77668 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 05-05-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAGAN SOOD
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

I TA NO. 1828.DEL.12 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-1828/DEL/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-07) PAT MERCAHNTILE & FIANCE CO. (P) LTD. C/O. AKHILESH KUMR, ADVOCATE, 206-07, ANSAL SATYAM RDC RAJ NAGAR GHAZIABAD PAN: AAACP8887F (APPELLANT) VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE MEERUT (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. GAGAN SOOD, SR. DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 25/1/2012 OF CIT(A) MEERUT PERTAINING TO 2006-07 ASSESSMENT YEA R. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSE E, ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO, NO ONE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON THE EARLIER DATES ASSESSEE HAD MOVED AN ADJOURNMENT WHICH WAS G RANTED AND THEREAFTER ON THE LAST OCCASION THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUE ST OF THE DEPARTMENT. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR ANY ADJOURNMENT IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT WHO DESPITE SENDING NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE ON 20 TH MARCH 2014 AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN COLUMN NO 10 IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSEE IS NO LONGER INTERESTED IN PERSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND THE ASSESSEES NON-REPRESENTATION IN T HE BACKGROUND DISCUSSED CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PU RSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. I TA NO. 1828.DEL.12 2 ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. SU PPORT IS DERIVED FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULT I PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. C WT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). IN THE SAID CASE WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT TH E INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THE HONBLE COURT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIO NS IN THEIR ORDER- IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATI ON OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 2. BEFORE PARTING IT IS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING THEN IT MAY IF SO ADVISED PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND AFTER REMOVAL OF THE DEFECTS ETC. REQUEST FOR A DECISION ON MERITS. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED IN LIMINE. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH OF MAY 2014. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 05/05/2014 *R. NAHEED* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI I TA NO. 1828.DEL.12 3