Bhikhabhai Ambalal Patel, Kalol V. ITO, Ward-4, Mehsana

ITA 2895/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2455 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-12-2019
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEELIPKUMAR
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

, B IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 2895/AHD/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) BHIKHABHAI AMBALAL PATEL PROP. OF DHANLAXMI PRINTERS, NAVJIVAN SHOPPING CENTRE, KALOL [VARIS V. ISANI 103, 104, 105, 106, 203, ELLISBRIGE SHOPPING CENTRE, OPP. TOWN HALL, ELLISBRIDGE, AHMEDABAD 380006] / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4, MEHSANA ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ABIPP8641B ( APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) & ./ I.T.A. NO. 2896/AHD/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) VIJAYKUMAR BHIKHABHAI PATEL PROP. VIJAY PET, PLOT NO. 139 GIDC, KALOL [VARIS V. ISANI 103, 104, 105, 106, 203, ELLISBRIGE SHOPPING CENTRE, OPP. TOWN HALL, ELLISBRIDGE, AHMEDABAD 380006] / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4, MEHSANA ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : BEPPP7324J ( APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ITA NOS.2895 & 2896/AHD/17 [BHIKHABHAI A. PATEL & VIJAYKUMAR B. PATEL VS. ITO] A.YS. 2008-09 & 2013-1 4 - 2 - / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI DEELIP KUMAR, SR.D.R. DATE OF HEARING 04/12/2019 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04/12/2019 / O R D E R PER BENCH: BOTH THE CAPTIONED APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED AT THE I NSTANCE OF TWO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDE RS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), GANDHINAGAR, (CIT(A) IN SHORT), DATED 04.08.2017 & 05.09.2017 ARISING IN TH E PENALTY ORDERS BOTH DATED 26.09.2016 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER (AO) UNDER S. 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) CONCERNING AYS. 2008-09 & 2013-14. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHA LF OF THE BOTH ASSESSEES. CASE FILES REVEAL THAT THE REGISTRY HAS ALREADY SENT AN RPAD NOTICE DATED 04.10.2019 TO ASSESSEE. IN THE A FOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF BOTH CASES, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR PETITIO N SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEALS FILED. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE DATES OF HEARING EVEN BEFORE THE CI T(A). ACCORDINGLY, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMIS S BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE . SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P)LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). ITA NOS.2895 & 2896/AHD/17 [BHIKHABHAI A. PATEL & VIJAYKUMAR B. PATEL VS. ITO] A.YS. 2008-09 & 2013-1 4 - 3 - 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE EXISTED A REASO NABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY, IF SO ADVISED, TO SEEK FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE . SD/- SD/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (PRADIP KUMAR K EDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 04/12/2019 TRUE COPY S. K. SINHA !'#' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- &. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE (. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. ,- / CIT (A) /. 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7. 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 /5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 04/12/2019