Smt. Suman Lakhani, New Delhi V. ACIT, Faridabad

ITA 416/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6268 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 17-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KK JASWAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH.PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-416/DEL /2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012-13) SMT. SUMAN LAKHANI, W-9, G.K.-II, NEW DELHI-110048. PAN-AAGPL7939R (APPELLANT) VS ACIT, CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE BY NONE R EVENUE BY SH. K.K.JASWAL , DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 13.11.2015 OF CIT(A) , FARIDABAD PERTAINING TO 2012-13 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. N O ONE WAS PRESENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. IN THE THIRD ROUND ALSO THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NOTICE OF THE DATE OF HEARING HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 11.02.2016. THE NOTICE HAS BEEN SEN T TO THE ADDRESS INDICATED BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO. 10 IN ITS MEMO OF APP EAL FILED, THE SAME HAS NOT RETURNED UNSERVED. IN THE AFORE-MENTIONED PECULIA R FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PE TITION SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMIS S THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRI BUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 32 0 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). DATE OF HEARING 17.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29.03.2016 I. T.A .NO.-416/DEL/2016 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CAS E THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPR ESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PR AY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING IT SELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH OF MARCH, 2016. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29/03/2016 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI