Shri Dilip V. Mavlankar, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT., Circle-13, Ahmedabad

ITA 2251/AHD/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 137 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0239 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-01-2010
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2007
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOVIND SINGHAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : A BENCH : AHMEDABAD (BEFORE HONBLE SHRI T.K. SHARMA, J.M. & HONBLE SH RI N.S. SAINI, A.M.) I.T.A. NO. 2251/AHD./2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-2004 SHRI DILIP V. MAVLANKAR, AHMEDABAD -VS.- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (PAN : ABEPM 2691 J) CIRCLE-13, AHMEDA BAD (APPELLANT) (R ESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : N O N E RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GOVIND SINGHAL, SR. D.R. O R D E R PER SHRI T.K. SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER :- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2007 OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XX, AHMEDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- BEING AGGRIEVED AND DISSATISFIED TO THE APPELLATE ORDER OF C.I.T.(APPEALS)-XX U.S. 250 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 APPELLANT HEARING PR EFERS AN APPEAL U/S. 253 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON FOLLOWING AMONGST OTHER GROUNDS : - (1) LD. C.I.T.(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT GRANTING DEDUCTION U/S. 80R, 80RR, 80RRA AN U/S. 80-O OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AND HAS FOLLOWED APPELLATE ORDER OF C.I.T.(A)- XX (ORDER OF PREDECESSOR) MECHANICALLY WITHOUT NOTING CHANGE IN FACTS, CONTRADICTIONS AND NOT FOLLOWING BINDING CIRCULARS AND THEREBY RENDERED APPELLATE JUDGMENT NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (2) LD. C.I.T.(A) HAS OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED CHANGE I N FACTS, CONTRADICTIONS AND BINDING NATURE OF CIRCULAR WITHO UT IGNORING SAME. 2. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING FOR TODAY, I.E. 13.01.2010, WAS ISSUED, WHICH WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD IS PLACED ON RECORD. DESPITE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE, ON THE DATE OF HEARING NEITHER A NYBODY APPEARED FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN APPLICATION OF ADJOURNMENT RECEIVED. 2 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PR OVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, AS WERE CONSIDERED IN 38 I.T.D. 320 (DELHI) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS.- MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED IN LI MINE. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 13.01.2010 SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) (T.K. SHA RMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 13 / 01 / 2010 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE (2) THE RESPONDENT 3) CIT(A) CONCERNED, (4) CIT CONCERNED,(5) D.R., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD LAHA/SR.P.S.