Shri Gautam Atmaram Parmar, Ahmedabad V. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1999/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8595 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 1994-1995
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH BEFORE: SHR I RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER GAUTAM ATMARAM PARMAR 6, POOJA BUNGALOWS, ASHWAMEGH PART - 1, RING ROAD, SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD PAN: AJUPP6745Q (APPELLANT) VS THE D CIT, CIRCLE - 3( 1 )(2) , AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI PRASOON KABRA , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 07 - 03 - 2 018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09 - 04 - 2 018 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : - THIS ASSESSEE S APP EAL FOR A. Y. 1994 - 95 , ARI SES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 9, AHMEDABAD DATED 07 - 06 - 2 016 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1 ) (C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT - ASSESSEE. L AST NOTICE OF HEARIN G DATED 13/02 /2018 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 07 /03/2018 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO. 10. DESPITE THIS, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE SAID NOTICE HAS NOT COME BACK UN - SERVED. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS I T A NO . 1999 / A HD/20 1 6 A SS ESSMENT YEAR 1994 - 95 I.T.A NO. 1999 /AHD/20 16 A.Y. 1994 - 95 PAGE NO GAUTAM ATMARAM PARMAR VS. D CIT 2 AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED . ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA VS . CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.). 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS 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, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPE AL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 09 - 0 4 - 201 8 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 09 /0 4 /2018 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,