Vinay Kumar Khanna, Rishikesh V. ITO, Rishikesh

ITA 3164/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 316420114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMEER SHARMA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: H NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-3164/DEL/ 2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) VINAY KUMAR KHANNA, 20/41, GANGA VIHAR COLONY, RISHIKESH P AN-AMLPK2612D (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-1, RISHIKESH (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. SAMEER SHARMA, SR. DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 20.02.2013 OF CIT(A)-I, DEHRADUN PERTAINING TO 2009-10 ASSESS MENT YEAR CHALLENGING THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN UPHOLDING THE PENALTY IMPOS ED BY THE AO U/S 271(1)(C). 2. HOWEVER AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESE NT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. DESPIT E THIS FACT NEITHER ANYONE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH. SINCE IN THE THIRD ROUND ALSO THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME . IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SER IOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT ABOUT TH EIR RIGHTS. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 IT R 480 (M.P). IN THE SAID I.T.A .NO.-3164/DEL/2013 2 CASE WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INS TANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THE HONBLE COURT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS IN TH EIR 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. WE HASTEN TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING THEN IT MAY IF SO ADVISED PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND DECISIO NS ON MERITS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST NOVEMBER 2013. SD/- SD/- (B.C.MEENA) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED:21/11/2013 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI