Sh. Arun Kumar Dhir, Chandigarh V. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

ITA 257/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4910 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: N K SAINI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHES SMD, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 257/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI ARUN KUMAR DHIR, VS THE DCIT, HOUSE NO. 269, CIRCLE -1(1), SECTOR 10, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN : AASPD5255C (A PPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.K.SAINI, ITP PROXY COUNSEL FOR SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, SR.-DR DATE OF HEARING : 23.05.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.06.2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSA ILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 03.04.2017 OF CIT(EXEMPTIO NS), CHANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS MO VED BY THE LD. AR SEEKING TIME. MR. N.K.SAINI PRESENT AS PROXY COUNSEL WAS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS THE MAINTAINABILITY OF THE APPEAL. IT W AS POINTED OUT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE LD. AR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHICH FACT HAS DULY BEEN NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT WAS FURTHER NOTED ON GOING THROUGH THE GROUNDS RAIS ED BEFORE THE ITAT THAT NO SUCH GROUND IS RAISED STATING THAT WITHDRAWAL WA S NOT MANDATED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT GROUND NOS. 1 AND 3 IN THE PRESENT APPEAL APPEAR TO BE GENERAL IN NATURE AND IN G ROUND NO. 2 THE ADDITION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, UPHELD IN THE IMPUG NED ORDER IS CHALLENGED ON MERITS BY AN ARGUMENTATIVE GROUND. HOWEVE R, NO CLAIM IS MADE THAT THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT DIRECTED. ACCORDINGLY, THE OCCASION TO SEEK TIME IN THE PECULIAR CIRC UMSTANCES WAS REQUIRED TO BE ADDRESSED. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT HE W AS PROXY COUNSEL AND THUS, WAS UNAWARE OF THE FACTS. THE APPEAL W AS PASSED ITA 257/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 2 OVER AND DIRECTED TO BE TAKEN ON ITS TURN SO AS TO FAC ILITATE THE COUNSEL TO FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF WITH THE CASE AND SEEK INSTRUCTIONS ETC. A CCORDINGLY, IN THE SECOND ROUND, WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING , THE LD. AR PLEADED IGNORANCE ON FACTS AND REQUESTED FOR TIME. 3. THE LD. DR POINTING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL, INFACT WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. ON GOING THROUGH THE SAME, WE FIND THAT THE RE QUEST FOR TIME IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE HAS TO BE REJECTED AS DESPITE OPPORTUNITY, PROXY COUNSEL HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO MAK E OUT ANY CASE SO AS TO JUSTIFY WHY ADJOURNMENT SHOULD BE GRANTED IN THE FACE OF THE SPEAKING ORDER OF THE CIT(A) FOR READY REFERENCE, THE SAME IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, LETTER HAS BEEN FILED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT, STATING THERE IN THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW APPEAL IN THIS CASE. THE WITHDRAWA L OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED AND FOR STATISTICS 1 PURPOSES, THE APPEAL I S TREATED AS DISMISSED. 2. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. ACCORDINGLY, ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION IS REJECTED IN VIEW OF THE UNAMBIGUOUS FACT OF WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY THE ASS ESSEE CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT NO GROUND ASSAILING THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN RAISED, IN VIEW THEREOF, THE APPEAL IS DIS MISSED IN LIMINE. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.06. 2018. SD/- SD/- (DR.B.R.KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.