Paul Rathnakumar E, CHENNAI V. DCIT Non Corporate Circle 2, CHENNAI

ITA 2362/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5706 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !' , $ % BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2362/MDS/2017 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI PAUL RATHNAKUMAR EARNARST, 37-D, F-1, 1 ST FLOOR, VIJAYARAGHAVA ROAD, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI - 600 017. PAN : AADPE 1203 G V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, CHENNAI - 600 034. (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : NONE ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 0 . 1$ / DATE OF HEARING : 11.12.2017 2!( . 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.12.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, CHENNAI , DATED 31.03.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD TO THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AT COL.NO.10 O F FORM 36. 2 I.T.A. NO.2362/MDS/17 HOWEVER, THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES RETURNED THE SAME W ITH AN ENDORSEMENT NO SUCH PERSON. THIS TRIBUNAL HAS NO MACHINERY TO TRACE OUT THE CORRECT ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE TO SE RVICE NOTICE. WHENEVER THERE IS A CHANGE OF ADDRESS, IT IS FOR TH E ASSESSEE TO INFORM THE REGISTRY SO THAT THE NOTICE CAN BE SENT TO THE CORRECT ADDRESS. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DETAILS REGARDING A DDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO SERVE THE NOTICE. ONE OF THE REASONS FOR NOT INTIMATING THE REGISTRY ABOUT CHANGE OF ADDRESS, PRESUMABLY THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE IN TERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. WHATEVER MAY BE THE REASON, BY KEEPING THE PROVI SO TO RULE 24 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963, IN MIND, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECU TION. HOWEVER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IT IS OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO MOVE TO THIS TRIBUNAL FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER PROVIDED THERE WA S SUFFICIENT CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFOR E THIS TRIBUNAL ON 11.12.2017 WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING . 4. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3 I.T.A. NO.2362/MDS/17 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH DECEMBER, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 11 TH DECEMBER, 2017. KRI. . ,156 76(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. 0 81 () /CIT(A)-2, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, CHENNAI 5. 69 ,1 /DR 6. :' ; /GF.