GEETA PAWANI, MUMBAI V. ITO RG 23(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 333/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 33319914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K NAYAK PER R K

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO.333/MUM/2010 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI MUMBAI G GG G BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI D MANMOHAN, VP & D MANMOHAN, VP & D MANMOHAN, VP & D MANMOHAN, VP & SHRI R K PANDA, AM SHRI R K PANDA, AM SHRI R K PANDA, AM SHRI R K PANDA, AM ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO. 333/MUM/2010 333/MUM/2010 333/MUM/2010 333/MUM/2010 (ASST YEAR (ASST YEAR (ASST YEAR (ASST YEAR 2003 2003 2003 2003- -- -04 0404 04) )) ) GEETA PAWANI PAWANI PLOT NEAR VIPUL ADS BHAKTI MARG MULUND (W) MUMBAI 80 VS TH INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE 23(2(3) MUMBAI ( (( (APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT APPELLANT) )) ) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO. PAN NO. A SSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI A K NAYAK PER R K PANDA, AM PER R K PANDA, AM PER R K PANDA, AM PER R K PANDA, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER DATED 4.12.2009 OF THE CIT(A) -33, MUMBAI RELATING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2 AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SEEN THAT THE VER IFICATION COLUMN IN FORM NO.36 HAS NOT BEEN SIGNED FOR WHICH THE APPEAL FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BECOME DEFECTIVE. ALTHOUGH, THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED ON 1.6.2010 AND THE CASE HAVING ADJOURNED FOUR TIMES (TWICE AT THE RE QUEST OF THE ASSESSEE AND TWICE DUE TO NON FUNCTIONING OF THE BENCH), THE ASS ESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY STEP TO REMOVE THE DEFECT. ON BEING QUESTIONED BY THE B ENCH, THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY ANO THER COUNSEL; THEREFORE, HE CANNOT EXPLAIN SUCH DEFECT. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTA NCES, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS UN-ADMITTED. 2 ITA NO.333/MUM/2010 3 HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IF SO ADVISED MAY FILE FRES H APPEAL. THE BENCH, IF SO SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE, MAY CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 4 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE S TANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ITSELF I.E. ON 5.4.2011 SD/ SD/ ( (( ( D MANMOHAN D MANMOHAN D MANMOHAN D MANMOHAN ) )) ) VICE PRESIDENT ( (( ( R K PANDA R K PANDA R K PANDA R K PANDA ) )) ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 6 TH , APRIL 2011 RAJ* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI