Pattarumadom Narjees Siddique, Perumbavoor V. The ITO, Aluva

ITA 194/COCH/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8588 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 25-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANTAM BOSE

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 194 /C/2016 & SP. 32/C/2016 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI B P JAIN , A M & GEORGE GEORGE.K , J M ITA NO. 194/COCH/2016 (ASST YEAR 2011 - 12 ) & STAY PETITION NO.32/COCH/2016 PATTARUMADOM NARJEES SIDDIQUE PATTARUMADOM HOUSE KANDANTHARA ALLAPRA PO PERUMBAVOOR VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) ALUVA ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AHTPN1263E ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH SHANTAM BOSE, CIT - DR DATE OF HEARING 25 TH MAY 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25 TH MAY 2016 ORDER PER GEORGE GEO RGE. K. J M: THIS APPEAL, AT THE INSTANT OF THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 3 RD FEB 2016. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2011 - 12. 2 AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF TH IS APPEAL NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE N OTICE WAS SENT THROUGH RPAD. THE NOTICE HAS BEEN SENT ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN ON FORM NO.36. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT INTIMATED CHANGE OF ADDRESS, IF ANY, TO THE TRIBUNAL. THERE IS NOT EVEN AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CIRCUMSTAN CES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE ITA NO. 194 /C/2016 & SP. 32/C/2016 2 IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL, AND NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY ADJOURNING THE HEARING. CONSIDERING THESE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES, AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA, REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR, REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. HOWEVER, IF THE ASSESSEE ON A LATER STAGE GIVES EXPLANATION IN REGARD TO ITS NON - APPEARANCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY FILING A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AS PER THE ITAT RULES AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE CAN BE RE CALLED FOR HEARING ON MERIT. 3 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. STAY PETITION NO.32/COCH/2016 4 SINCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES, AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA, REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR, REPORTED IN 223 ITR 480, WE DISMISS THE STAY PETITION ALSO APPEAL IN LIMINE, AS NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 194 /C/2016 & SP. 32/C/2016 3 5 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL AND THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF MAY 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - ( B P JAIN ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER COCHIN: DATED 2 5 TH MAY 2016 RAJ* COPY TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT, 5 . DR 6 . GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, COCHIN