The Income-tax Officer, Srinagar V. M/s. Mohammad Yousuf Kuchay & others, Kathua

ITA 291/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 29120914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: Y K SAXENA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 291(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 PAN: INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S MOHAMMAD YOUSUF WARD III(2), KASHMIR KUCHAY & OTHERS HUMHAMA, BUDGAM, KASHMIR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. Y.K. SAXENA, DR RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 30.08.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02.09.2013 ORDER PER BENCH 1) THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL A GAINST IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.02.2013 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JAMMU, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2) AS PER THE RECORD, THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRE SENT APPEAL ON 03.05.2013 AND THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT THAT TH E REVENUE HAS FILLED 2 I.T.A. NO. 291(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 THE APPEAL ON SUGGESTED GROUNDS OF APPEAL, WHICH IS NOT PERMISSION UNDER THE LAW. REGISTRY HAS ALSO POINTED OUT THE FOLLOWIN G DEFECTS IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, WHICH WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE APPELLANT VID E DEFECT MEMO DATED 04.06.2013: 1. COLUMN NOS. 3A & 3B ARE NOT FILLED IN. 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ARE NOT PROPERLY SIGNED. 3. FORM NO. 36 IS NOT CORRECT AS PER INCOME TAX RULES. 4. CAUSE TITLE OF MEMO OF APPEAL IS NOT CORRECTLY/COMP LETELY FILLED IN. 3) THE REGISTRY AGAIN ISSUED REMINDER ON 18.07.2013 TO THE APPELLANT BUT DESPITE THIS THE APPELLANT HAS NOT CO MPLIED WITH THE SAME. 4) THE REGISTRY FIXED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE TH IS BENCH FOR 30.08.2013 BY ISSUING RPAD BUT TILL DATE THE APPELL ANT HAS NOT RECTIFIED THE AFORESAID DEFECTS. 5) KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID FACTS AND CIRCUMST ANCES THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT RECTIFIED THE DEFECTS AS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY VIDE DEFECT MEMO, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE. THEREFORE, THE PRE SENT APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE, BEING DEFECTIVE WITH THE LIBERTY TO THE APPELLANT TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER, IF SO ADVI SED, BUT ONLY AFTER RECTIFYING THE DEFECTS AS POINTED OUT BY THE REGIST RY IN THE SAID DEFECT MEMO AND THAT APPLICATION WOULD BE DECIDED UNDER TH E LAW. 3 I.T.A. NO. 291(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 6) IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED IN LIMINE, BEING DEFECTIVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND SEPTEMBER, 2013. SD/./- SD/./- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2 ND SEPTEMBER, 2013 /RK/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: M/S MOHAMMAD YOUSUF KUCHAY & OTHERS H UMHAMA, BUDGAM, KASHMIR 2. ITO, WARD III(2), KASHMIR 3. THE CIT(A), JAMMU 4. THE CIT, JAMMU 5. THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., ASR TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.