M/s Asha Ahuja, Hisar V. ITO, Hisar

ITA 2223/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8416 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : E , NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH , JUDICIAL M EMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO . 2223 /DE L/ 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 SMT. ASHA AHUJA, 1613, SECTOR - 13, HISAR VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, HISAR PAN : ACKPA6723G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, J. M . : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 11.01.2016 OF CIT(A), HISSAR, PERTAINING TO THE AY: 2011 - 12, WHEREIN AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN MOVED SEEKING TIME ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE COUNSEL IS OUT OF STATION. 2. MS. RINKU SINGH , SR. DR., APPEARING FOR TH E REVENUE OBJECTED TO THE GRANT OF TIME STATING THAT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, NO GROUNDS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. POSITION WA S ASCERTAINED FROM BOTH THE SETS AVAILABLE WITH THE BENCH WHEREIN ALSO COPY OF GROUNDS WAS FOUND TO BE MISSING. IT WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE PROXY COUNSEL THAT VARIOUS DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGIS TRY ON 9 TH MAY, 2016 REMAINED UNCURED WHEREIN EVEN THE FOLLOWING DEFECT HAS ALSO NOT BEEN CURED TILL DATE: 16. FORM NO. 36 ALONGWITH GROUNDS OF APPEALS AND VERIFICATION IS NOT FILED IN TRIPLICATE. ASSESSEE BY SH. NIPPUN MITTAL, CA DEPARTMENT BY MS. RINKU SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 02.01.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03.01.2019 2 ITA NO.2223/DEL/2016 3. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST WAS REJECTED AS IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED AS THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED WITHOUT THE GROUNDS . D ESPITE ISSUE OF NOTICES FOR REMOVAL OF DEFECT, NO ATTEMPT HAS BEEN M ADE TO CURE THE DEFECT. PROXY C OUNSEL, SH. NIPPUN MITTAL, CA, COULD NOT MAKE ANY SUBMISSION ON THE SAID ISSUE . 4. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963 AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED . 7. RESPECTFULLY FOLLO WING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASE CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE . BEFORE PARTING, WE ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED, THEN SHE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MOVING AN APPROPRIATE PETITION AND ALSO BY TAKING APPROPRIA TE ACTION TO CORRECT THE DEFECT POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY . TH E CO - ORDINATE BENCH CONSIDERING THE PETITION, IF SO SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION AND THE ACTIONS OF CURING THE DEFECTS, MAY RECALL THIS ORDER. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS DEFECTIVE. SAID ORDER IS PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 R D JANUARY , 201 9 . S D / - S D / - ( R.K. PANDA ) ( DIVA SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 3 R D JANUARY , 201 9 . RK / - COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI