Peeyush Goel, V. ITO Ward-2 (1),

ITA 2228/DEL/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4194 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 27-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MONA MOHANTY

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH C CC C : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L.SETHI, JM AND SHRI BEFORE SHRI C.L.SETHI, JM AND SHRI BEFORE SHRI C.L.SETHI, JM AND SHRI BEFORE SHRI C.L.SETHI, JM AND SHRI K. K.K. K.D.RANJAN D.RANJAN D.RANJAN D.RANJAN, AM , AM , AM , AM ITA NO ITA NO ITA NO ITA NOS SS S. .. .2227/DEL/2008 & 2228/DEL/2008 2227/DEL/2008 & 2228/DEL/2008 2227/DEL/2008 & 2228/DEL/2008 2227/DEL/2008 & 2228/DEL/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEARS SS S : : : : 2001 2001 2001 2001- -- -02 & 2002 02 & 2002 02 & 2002 02 & 2002- -- -03 0303 03 SHRI PIYUSH GOEL, SHRI PIYUSH GOEL, SHRI PIYUSH GOEL, SHRI PIYUSH GOEL, 258, GARDEN HOUSE, 258, GARDEN HOUSE, 258, GARDEN HOUSE, 258, GARDEN HOUSE, OPP. COMMISSIONERS OPP. COMMISSIONERS OPP. COMMISSIONERS OPP. COMMISSIONERS RES RES RES RESIDENCE, IDENCE, IDENCE, IDENCE, CIVIL LINES, CIVIL LINES, CIVIL LINES, CIVIL LINES, MEERUT, MEERUT, MEERUT, MEERUT, UP UP UP UP 250 001. 250 001. 250 001. 250 001. PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO.ACGPG5161J. ACGPG5161J. ACGPG5161J. ACGPG5161J. VS. VS. VS. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -2(1), 2(1), 2(1), 2(1), MEERUT. MEERUT. MEERUT. MEERUT. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE. RESPONDENT BY : SMT.MONA MOHANTY, SR.DR ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER C.L.SETHI PER C.L.SETHI PER C.L.SETHI PER C.L.SETHI, J , J, J , JM : M : M : M : THESE TWO APPEALS, FILED BY THE SAME ASSESSEE, ARE DIRECTED AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS BOTH DATED 18.3.2008 PA SSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE MATTER OF A PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY T HE AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) PERTAINING TO THE AY 2001-02 AND 2002-03 RESPECTIVELY. 2. THESE TWO APPEALS WERE EARLIER DISMISSED FOR WAN T OF PROSECUTION VIDE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 11.2.2010. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT WITH A REQUEST TO RECALL THE TRIBUNALS AFORESAID ORDER DATED 11.2.2010 AND REST ORE THE APPEALS TO ITS FILE FOR DISPOSAL ON MERIT AFTER PROVIDING AN O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICA TIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE REGISTERED AS M.A.NOS.293 & 294/DEL/2 010 PERTAINING TO AY 2001-02 AND 2002-03 RESPECTIVELY. ITA-2227 & 2228/DEL/2008 2 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, THE TRIBUNAL WAS PLEASED TO RECALL ITS ORDER DATED 11.2.2010 AND DIRECTED THE APPEALS TO BE FIXED FOR FRESH HEARING ON 10.11.2010 FOR WHICH NO NOTICE WAS DIREC TED TO BE ISSUED INASMUCH AS BOTH THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN OPEN COURT WHILE HEARING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ON 10.11.2010, THESE APPEALS WERE THEN FIXED FOR HEARI NG. HOWEVER, ON THAT DATE, THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 8.1.2011 AND BOTH THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED ACCORDINGLY. ON 8.1.2011, THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION, HENCE THE APPEALS WERE ADJOURNED TO 27.4.2011. A N OTICE OF HEARING FIXING THE DATE ON 27.4.2011 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESS EE ON 15.2.2011 AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER:- SHRI PIYUSH GOEL, 258, GARDEN HOUSE, OPP. COMMISSIONERS RESIDENCE, CIVIL LINES, MEERUT (UP), 250 001. 4. THIS IS THE SAME ADDRESS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESS EE IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL AS WELL AS IN THE MISCELLANEOU S APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AFORESAID NOTICE SENT O N 15.2.2011 TO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED. THEREFORE , IT IS PRESUMED UNDER THE LAW THAT THE NOTICE HAS BEEN SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF TIME. A SUFFICIENT TIME HAS E LAPSED FROM THE DATE OF THE ISSUE OF NOTICE TILL TODAY, I.E. 27.4.2011. HOWEVER, TODAY I.E. ON 27.4.2011 WHEN THESE APPEALS WERE CALLED ON BOARD, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR A DJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT T AKEN ANY STEP IN THIS REGARD. IT, THEREFORE, SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSE E IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THESE APPEALS. HENCE, THESE APPEALS FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIS MISSED FOR NON- ITA-2227 & 2228/DEL/2008 3 PROSECUTION. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRE, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER BY E XPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON 27.4.2011 WHICH SHALL BE CONS IDERED AS PER LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 27 TH APRIL, 2011. SD/- SD/- (K.D.RANJAN (K.D.RANJAN (K.D.RANJAN (K.D.RANJAN) )) ) (C.L.SETHI (C.L.SETHI (C.L.SETHI (C.L.SETHI) )) ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 27.04.2011. VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR