Sh. Baljeet Singh, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2975/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6332 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 14-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APPLICATION REJECTED
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-2975/DE L/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08) BALJEET SINGH, A-176, FATEH NAGAR, JAIL ROAD, NEW DELHI-110018. PAN-AAYPS3089B (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-27(4), NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE BY NONE R EVENUE BY APPLICATION REJECTED ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 25.02.2014 OF CIT(A) -XXIV, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2007-08 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE THERE IS AN ADJOURNMENT STATING THAT THE SR. DR IS ON LEAVE. SINCE NO ONE WAS PRESENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. EVEN IN THE THIRD ROUND THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS TH AT THE APPEAL FIRST CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 21/09/2015 ON WHICH DATE IT WAS ADJO URNED AS NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NEXT IT CAME UP FOR HEA RING ON 22/09/2015 ON WHICH DATE IT WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE A SSESSEE TO 23/11/2015. ON THE SAID DATE AGAIN NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN AND NOTICE WAS DIRECT ED TO BE SENT BY RPAD. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 26/11/2015 AND IT WAS SENT TO THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO. 10 IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL. DESPITE THIS THE ASSESSEE HAS STILL NOT CHO SEN TO PUT IN ANY PRESENCE. IN THE AFORE-MENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE THE DEPARTMENTAL APPLICATION WAS REJECTED AND IN THE AB SENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION DATE OF HEARING 14.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28.03.2016 I. T.A .NO.-2975/DEL/2014 PAGE 2 OF 2 OR PETITION SEEKING TIME MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUI NG THE APPEAL FILED. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMIS S THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRI BUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 32 0 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CAS E THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPR ESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PR AY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING IT SELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH OF MARCH, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED: 28/03/2016 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI