M/s Rampur Zila Sahkari Bank Ltd., Moradabad V. ITO, Meerut

ITA 3325/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 69581 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S.KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-3325/DEL/ 2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08) RAMPUR ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD. C/O-A.K.SINGHAL, ADV., B-556, LAJPAT NAGAR, MORADABAD, U.P. P AN-AAALR0004R (APPELLANT) VS ACIT, RANGE-1, CIVIL LINE, MORADABAD, U.P. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. NEEHAR RANJAN PANDEY ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.03.2013 OF CIT(A), BAREILLY PERTAINING TO 2007-08 ASSESSMEN T YEAR. 2. HOWEVER AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESE NT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH. THE APPEA L WAS PASSED OVER. THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO WHEN IT WAS CALLED OUT. ACCORDINGLY WHEN IT CAME UP FOR HEARING IN THE THIR D ROUND, CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD WHICH SHOWED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EVEN CARED TO CURE THE DEFECT POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY ON 25.1 0.2013 AND DESPITE INTIMATION OF THE DATE OF HEARING HAS CHOSEN TO REMAIN UNREPRE SENTED, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SER IOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND THE ASSESSEES NON- REPRESENTATION IN THE BACKGROUND DISCUSSED ABOVE CL EARLY DEMONSTRATES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APP EAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS I.T.A .NO.-3325/DEL/2013 2 THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE ORD ER 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 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 AFTER R EMOVAL OF THE DEFECTS ETC. REQUEST FOR A DECISION ON MERITS. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED IN LIMINE. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH OF DECEMBER 2013. SD/- SD/- (T.S.KAPOOR) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED:- 06 /12/2013 *AMIT KUMAR/R.NAHEED* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASS ISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI I.T.A .NO.-3325/DEL/2013 3