Nec Pharmaceutical, Solan V. ITO, Ward, Parwanoo

ITA 33/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5172 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDER KANTA SR DR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC CHANDIGARH !', # ! . %.. . & , '( BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, AM ITA NO. 33/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 NEC PHARMACEUTICAL, KASAULI ROAD, VILLAGE-JANGESHU, P.O. MASULKHANA, TEH. KASAULI, DISTT. SOLAN (HP). VS ITO, WARD, PARWANOO. PAN NO: AABCB2610D APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : NONE #!' REVENUE BY : SMT. CHANDER KANTA, SR.DR $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 29.08.2018 '()*! & D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.10.2018 ')/ ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 25.10.2017 OF CIT(A), FARIDA BAD PERTAINING TO 2007-08 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. DESPITE TH AT, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING I.E. 24.07.2018. THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED ON THE WR ITTEN REQUEST OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ASSESSEE WAS REPRESENTED B Y SHRI S.BABBAR. HOWEVER, DESPITE HAVING NOTICE OF THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. NO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS B EEN FILED TILL THE DATE OF PASSING OF THIS ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE DESP ITE AWARENESS, ASSESSEE HAS REMAINED UNREPRESENTED, IT MAY BE SAFELY P RESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. S UPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT V S MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MAD HYA PRADESH ITA 33/CHD/2018 A.Y.2007-08 PAGE 2 OF 2 HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVE NTUALITY 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 LIBER TY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.10.2018. SD/- SD/- ( . %.. . & ) ( !' ) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) '( / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # / JUDICIAL MEMBER + , (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT - 2. THE RESPONDENT - 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE (+ $ BY ORDER, ; # ASSISTANT REGISTRAR