Harpreet Singh Lotey, Ludhiana V. Addl. CIT, Ludhiana

ITA 226/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9921 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 226/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SHRI HARPREET SINGH LOTEY, VS THE ADDL.CIT, PROP. M/S D.S.BUILDERS, RANGE V, 10052, KOT MANGAL SINGH CHOWK, LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: AZQPS2045G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.06.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.06.2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-2 LUDHIANA DATED 07.12.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 CHALLENGING THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272A OF THE INCOME TA X ACT. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE PENALTY ORDER NOTED THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS HAVE BEEN INITIATED AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIV ERED A COPY OF THE STATEMENT WITHIN TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB- SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE ACT. THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE REFERRED TO ADDL. CIT, RANGE-V, LUDHIANA FOR NOT FURNISHING STATEMENT OR PARTICULAR S 2 MENTIONED UNDER SECTION 206 AND UNDER SECTION 200(3 ) IN DUE TIME. THE ASSESSEE'S COUNSEL REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LATER ON NOBODY ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, PENALTY WAS IMPOSED AGAINST TH E ASSESSEE. SAME IS THE POSITION BEFORE LD. CIT(APPE ALS) BECAUSE DESPITE ISSUING SEVERAL NOTICES, NOBODY ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS). THEREFORE, LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED LEVY OF PENAL TY AND DISMISSED APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SERVED NOTICE AT THE TIME OF FILING OF THE APPEAL ITSELF AS PER RECORD, THEREFOR E, NOTICE HAS BEEN SERVED ON ASSESSEE FOR HEARING OF THE APPE AL FIXED FOR 13.06.2016. NONE APPEARED BEFORE TRIBUNA L ON THE DATE OF HEARING. IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS ASSESS EE IS NO MORE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. LD. DR CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN COMPLYING WITH STATUTORY NOTICES EVEN BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, THEREFORE, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RESPOND T O THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE OF THE PENALTY BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ALSO DID NOT ATTEND THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS). IN THE GROUND S OF APPEAL, ASSESSEE HAS MERELY EXPLAINED THE NON- ATTENDANCE BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, NO EVI DENCE OR MATERIAL HAS BEEN PRODUCED IN THIS REGARD. THE 3 APPEAL IS NOT CONTESTED ON MERIT. DESPITE SERVICE OF THE NOTICE, NONE APPEARED BEFORE ME AT THE TIME OF HEAR ING OF THE APPEAL. I AM, THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE RIGHTLY LEVIED THE PENALTY A GAINST THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FURNISHING THE STATEMENTS OR PARTICULARS MENTIONED UNDER SECTION 206 AND UNDER SECTION 200(3) OF THE ACT IN DUE TIME. IN THE ABSE NCE OF ANY MATERIAL AND ANY REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF TH E ASSESSEE, I AM NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE O RDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE HAS NO MERIT, SAME IS, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 14 TH JUNE, 2016. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD