Sh. Anil Malhotra, Ludhiana V. DCIT, C-VII, Ludhiana

ITA 239/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4954 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHSMD, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.239/CHD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SH. ANIL MALHOTRA VS. THE DCIT B-XIX-160, CIRCLE-VII COL. GURDIAL SINGH ROAD LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN: ACHPM4858R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SH. MANJIT SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 21/05/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22/05/2018 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, A.M. : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-4, LUDHIANA DT. 25/01/2018 PERTAININ G TO A.Y. 2008-09 ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE ON 22/02/2018. THE APPEAL WERE FIXED FOR HEARING BEFOR E THE BENCH TODAY I.E 21.05.2018. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN NO APPLICATION SEEKIN G ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. SUPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. 2 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE F OR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED I N THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 22/05/2018 AG COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR