Mansukhbhai M. Donga HUF, Ahmedabad V. ITO, Ward-7(2)(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 2953/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6370 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 2 , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , SM C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE , SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS . MADHUMITA ROY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO S.2952 - 2953/AHD/2017 / ASSTT. YEAR : 2014 - 2015 MANSUKHBHAI M. DONGA , 50, DAHYALAL PARK , INSIDE VIKRAM PARK , THAKKARBAPA NAGAR , AHMEDABAD . PAN: ADCPD8617K VS . INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD - 7(2 ) (3) , AHMEDABAD . (APPLICANT) ( RESPON D ENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SATISH SOLANKI , SR . DR / DATE OF HEARING : 12 / 09 / 201 9 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16 /10 /2 01 9 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL S HAVE BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE AS SESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 7 , AHMEDABAD [ LD. CIT (A) IN SHORT] , OF EVEN DATED 18 / 10 / 2017 ARISING IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER S. 143 (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( HERE - IN - AFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') DATED 26 / 12 / 2016 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (A . Y) 2014 - 15 . ITA NO S.2952 - 2953/AHD/2017 ASSTT. YEAR 2014 - 15 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. IT IS NOTED FROM THE ORDER SHEET THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENTED ON 28/12/ 201 7 AND WAS ON THE BOARD SINCE 15/05/2019 . THEREAFTER, ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS FROM TIME TO TIME . ON 12/09/ 2019 ALSO N EITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY INTIMATION WAS SENT TO T HE REGISTRY STATING THE REASON FOR NON - APPEARANCE IN THE MATTER. THEREFORE, IT IS AMPLY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS ABOUT PURSUING HIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL . T HEREFORE, WE LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKA VS. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.). 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE T O ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE CAN SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON - REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, HE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED . O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16 /10 / 2019 AT AHMEDABAD. - SD - - SD - (MS . MADHUMITA ROY ) (WASEEM AHMED) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER (TRUE COPY) A HMEDABAD; DATED 16 / 10 /2019 M ANISH