Shri Gautam Atmaram Parmar, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT, Circle-5 , Now ACIT, Circle-3(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 409/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8102 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 1992-1993
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH BEFORE: SHR I RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER GAUTAM ATMARAM PARMAR, 6, POOJA BUNGALOWS, ASHWAMEGH PART - 1, RING ROAD, SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD - 380015 PAN: AJUPP6745Q (APPELLANT) VS THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 5 , AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI MUDIT NAGPAL , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 22 - 11 - 2 017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 - 11 - 2 017 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : - THESE THREE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A. Y. 1991 - 92 TO 1993 - 94 , AR I SE FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 9, AHMEDABAD DATED 09 - 1 2 - 2 014 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1 ) (C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEH ALF OF T HE APPELLANT - ASSESSEE. LAST NOTICE OF HEARIN G WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE I T A NO S . 408 TO 410 / A HD/20 15 A .Y. 1991 - 92 TO 1993 - 94 I.T.A NO S . 408 TO 410 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 1991 - 12 TO 1993 - 94 PAGE NO GAUTAM ATMARAM PARMAR VS. ACIT 2 ON 12/10 /2017 FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 22/11 /2017 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO. 10. DESPITE THIS, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE SAID NO TICE HAS NOT COME BACK UN - SERVED. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PUR SUING THE APPEAL S FILED. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN 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 HOLKA VS. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.). 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE 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, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPE AL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 23 - 11 - 201 7 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 23 /11 /2017 I.T.A NO S . 408 TO 410 /AHD/20 15 A.Y. 1991 - 12 TO 1993 - 94 PAGE NO GAUTAM ATMARAM PARMAR VS. ACIT 3 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,