ITO, Chandigarh V. Sh. B.K. Khanna, Chandigarh

ITA 195/CHANDI/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2361 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2013
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 04-03-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, A.M AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA , JM IT(SS)A NO. 74/CHD/2004 BP: 1.4.87 TO 20.11.1997 A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 1(1) V K.K. JERATH CHANDIGARH #8, SECTOR 7, CHANDIGARH IT(SS)A NO. 75/CHD/2004 BP: 1.4.87 TO 20.11.1997 A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 1(1) V KAPIL DEV JERATH CHANDIGARH #8, SECTOR 7, CHANDIGARH IT(SS)A NO. 76/CHD/2004 BP: 1.4.87 TO 20.11.1997 A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 1(1) V SMT. SAVITA JERATH CHANDIGARH #8, SECTOR 7, CHANDIGARH IT(SS)A NO. 77/CHD/2004 BP: 1.4.87 TO 20.11.1997 A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 1(1) V M/S VRINDAVAN ELECTRICALS CHANDIGARH P NO. 93, PHASE II, PKL IT(SS)A NO. 78/CHD/2004 BP: 1.4.87 TO 20.11.1997 A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 1(1) V BAL KRISHAN KHANNA CHANDIGARH 2200, SECTOR 15C, CHANDIGARH ITA NO. 195/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 I.T.O. WARD 1(4) V B.K. KHANNA CHANDIGARH 2200, SECTOR 15C CHANDIGARH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENTS) APPELLANT BY: SHRI N.K. SAINI WITH ADJOURNMENT APP LICATION RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL DATE OF HEARING 16.5.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22.5.2013 2 O R D E R PER BENCH IN THESE APPEALS THE REVENUE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GR OUNDS. SHRI N.K. SAINI, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND FILED A LETTER DATED 18.5.2013 IN WHICH IT IS IT IS STATED THAT SMT. JYOTI KUMARI, CIT-D.R WHO IS TO ARGUE THIS CASE, IS ON LE AVE. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THESE APPEALS WERE FILED IN THE YE AR 2004 AND WERE BEING ADJOURNED FROM AUGUST, 2005. MANY TIMES THE REVENUE HAS BEEN MADE AWARE THAT THEY SHOULD NOT TA KE FURTHER ADJOURNMENTS. IN FACT MOST OF SUCH ADJOURN MENTS HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT. WE UNDERSTAND THAT AT MOST OF THE PLACES THE C.C.I.TS HAVE CONSTITUTED A PANEL OF OTHER CIT- D.R TO REPRESENT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE SOME C IT-D.R IS GOING ON LEAVE AND THEREFORE, WHEN SMT. JYOTI KUMA RI, CIT WAS GOING ON LEAVE, THE C.C.I.T WAS DUTY BOUND TO M AKE ALTERNATIVE ARRANGEMENT FOR REPRESENTATION OF THE R EVENUE. THIS IS PARTICULAR SO WHEN THE CASES WERE LISTED FO R HEARING/S RIGHT FROM 2005 AND THE REVENUE HAD SOUGHT MORE THA N 15 ADJOURNMENTS IN THIS CASE. IT WAS POINTED OUT TO H IM THAT THIS POSITION WAS EXPLAINED TO THE D.RS ON EARLIER OCCAS IONS ALSO BUT NO ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN TILL DATE. SHRI N.K. SAINI DID NOT HAVE ANY ANSWER FOR THE SAME AND HE SIMPLY SAID THA T HE HAD INFORMED THE C.C.I.T ABOUT THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE BENCH. IT SEEMS THAT THE MESSAGE HAS NOT BEEN CONVE YED TO THE C.C.I.T THAT HE IS DUTY BOUND TO MAKE ALTERNATI VE ARRANGEMENT BY DEPUTING OTHER LOCAL CITS AS DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVES OR OTHER OFFICER TO REPRESENT THE C ASES. SINCE 3 IN THIS CASE THE REVENUE HAS SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS ON MANY OCCASIONS AND NOW WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO GRANT ANY FURTHER ADJOURNMENT. 2. FURTHER IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY HON'BLE MADRAS H IGH COURT IN CASE OF BHAWARLAL C. BAFNA V. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 687 (MAD) THAT ADJOURNMENTS ARE NOT MATTER OF RIGHT AND ONCE MANY ADJOURNMENTS ARE TAKEN, THE TRIBUNAL COULD TAK E NOTE OF CONDUCT OF THE PARTY AND REFUSE THE ADJOURNMENT IN ITS DISCRETION. THEREFORE, IN THIS CASE WE REFUSE TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT. 3. IT SEEMS THAT THE REVENUE IS NOT INTERESTED IN P URSUING THESE APPEALS AND THE INSTANT APPEALS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. IN THIS CASE WE ARE FORTIFIED BY THE FO LLOWING CASE LAWS: (I) CIT V. MULTI PLAN INDIA LTD, 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) ` (II) ESTATE OF LALTE TUKAJIRAO HOLKAR V.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) (III) CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARJEE & ANOTHER, 18 ITR 461. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE CITED CASE LAWS WE DISMISS THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE FOR NON PROSECUTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMIS SED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 22.5.2013 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 22.5.2013 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR 4