Parvatiya Plywood (P) Ltd., Uttrakhand V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3129/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3117 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 18-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NIRMAL JIT SINGH
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 3129/DEL/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLA TE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL M EMBER I.T.A .NO. 3129/DEL/2 017 (A.Y 2012-13) PARVATIYA PLYWOOD (P) LTD. VILLAGE SHIVALPUR, RAMNAGAR, DISTT. NAINITAL UTTRAKHAND AAACP4522H (APPELLANT) VS ITO WARD-19(3) NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. NIRMAL JIT SINGH, SR. DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 21/03/2017 OF CIT(A) -16 NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2012 13 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESEN T ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE 2 ND ROUND ALSO NEITHER THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMEN T HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. THE RECORD FURTHER SHOWS THAT THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT A DEFECT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED ON 18/05/2017, I.E. ON THE VERY DATE OF THE FILING OF THE APPEAL ITSELF. DESPITE THAT THE DEFECT REMAINS NOT CURED. THE RECORD FURTHER SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING ON 11/09/ 2017 ON WHICH DATE THE DATE OF HEARING 04.12.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 08.12.2017 2 ITA NO. 3129/DEL/2017 APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED ON THE WRITTEN REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES GRANT OF ANY FURTHER TIME W OULD BE A WASTE OF GOVERNMENT TIME AND MACHINERY AS IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILE D. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND THE ASSESSEES NON-REPRESENTATION IN THE BACKGROUND DISCUSSED CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIO US IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN L IMINE. SUPPORT, IT DEEM FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND DECISION OF MADHYA P RADESH HIGH COURT IN ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P) . IN THE SAID CASE WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THE HONBLE COURT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS IN THEIR ORDER- IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPAR ATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE F OR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING THEN IT MAY IF SO ADVISED PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND ON UNDERTAKING TO REMOVE THE DEFECTS ETC. REQUEST F OR A DECISION ON MERITS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08 TH DECEMBER, 2017 . SD/- (D IVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 08/12/2017 DNS/R. NAHEED* 3 ITA NO. 3129/DEL/2017 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 05/12/2017 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 06/12/2017 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER .2017 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 08.12.2017 PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 0 8 .12.2017 PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 4 ITA NO. 3129/DEL/2017 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.