Amorn Narang, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2481/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6468 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 01-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 28-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

I.T.A .NO.-2481/DEL/2015 AMORN NARANG VS ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-II NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-2481/DEL/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2005-06) AMORN NARANG, C/O-MR.RAJESH ARYA, C-48, KIRTI NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110015. PAN-AADPN5235D ( APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-25(4)/ DAO-43, NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH. RAJESH KUMAR, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 01 . 11 .2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16 .1 2 .2016 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 25.02.2015 OF CIT(A)-XVII, NEW DELHI PE RTAINING TO 200506 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRES ENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. IN THE THIRD ROUND A LSO, NEITHER ANYONE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE REC ORD SHOWS THAT WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 21.07.2016, NO ONE WAS PRESE NT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THEREAFTER ANOTHER NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE AD DRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO. 10 IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING AS 07.09.2016. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE WHEREIN ACCEPTING THE REQUEST, ADJOURNMENT WAS GRANTED. THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING A S 01.11.2016 HAS BEEN NOTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. DESPITE THIS FACT, ON THE DATE OF HEARING NEITHER THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT A DEFECT BY ISSUANCE OF NO TICE ON 15.10.2015 WHICH TILL DATE REMAINS NOT REMOVED. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUI NG THE APPEAL FILED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. SUPP ORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI P LAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 48 0 (M.P). 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CAS E THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT PAGE 2 OF 2 I.T.A .NO.-2481/DEL/2015 AMORN NARANG VS ITO LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED IN LIMINE. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH OF DECEMBER, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI