Sh. Naresh Kumar, Chandigarh V. ITO, Chandigarh

ITA 297/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6974 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDER KANTASR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO 297/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SHRI NARESH KUMAR, VS. THE ITO, PROP. M/S DURGA KELA BHANDAR, WARD 2, SCF-9, GRAIN MARKET, SECTOR 26, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN NO. ABCPK24433Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDER KANTA,SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.08.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSA ILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 07.12.2016 OF LD. CIT (APP EALS)-2 CHANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 2007-08 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUN DS. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSES SEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. NEITHER THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. IT IS FURTHER SEEN FROM THE RECORD THAT ON THE DATE THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING I.E. 27.03.2017, AN ADJOURNMENT WAS MOVED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE'S COUNSEL STATING THAT HE IS UNABLE TO COME DU E TO SOME FAMILY REASONS. THEREAFTER, ON THE SUBSEQUENT DATES WHEN TH E APPEAL WAS FIXED, BENCH WAS NOT FUNCTIONAL. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN THE AB SENCE OF ANY ADJOURNMENT REQUEST AND CONSEQUENTLY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FOR NON-REPRESENTATION, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. SUPPORT IS FROM THE OR DER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD . (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COUR T IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 2 23 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. ITA297/CHD/2017 A .Y 2007-08 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE E VENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE C AUSE FOR NON- REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBE RTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.08. 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) 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.