M/s. Oriental Bank of Commerce, Bhilwara V. ITO (TDS), Bhilwara

ITA 42/JODH/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by M/s Oriental Bank of Commerce against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ajmer, which confirmed additions made under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2011-12. The primary contention was regarding the legality and justification of these additions. However, the appeal was dismissed due to the non-appearance of the assessee's representatives and the failure to provide a valid address for communication, compounded by the fact that the bank had merged with Punjab National Bank and did not update the tribunal about this change.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 122760 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-02-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.42/Jodh/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2011- 2012 ) M/S. Oriental Bank of Commerce, C/o-B.B.Gupta & Associates, Chartered Accountants, F-122- 123, Heera Panna Market, Pur Road, Bhilwara-311001. vs ITO (TDS), Bhilwara (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. JDHO00947C Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, JCIT DR Date of hearing 22/03/2023 Date of Pronouncement 23/03/2023 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M.: The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Ajmer dated 26.11.2019. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. “The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the order passed by Ld.AO which is bad in law, bad on facts and in law in confirming an addition is not justified. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.542790/- u/s 201(1) and Rs.483779/- u/s 201(1A) is not justified and bad in law. 3. The assessee craves to amend, alter and modify any of the grounds of appeal on or before its hearing before your honour. 4. The appropriate cost be awarded to the assessee.” 2. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. It is also seen from the record that no one has been attending the proceedings since 02.05.2019 on behalf of the assessee. The notice of hearing has been returned back unserved by the Postal Authority with remark “no such person in this address”. Therefore, under these facts, the appeal is taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and disposed off on the material available on record. 3. We have heard Ld. JCIT DR and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee has not furnished any other address for communication. Moreover, it is seen that as per Form No.36, name of the assessee is M/s Oriental Bank of Commerce. However, the Oriental Bank of Commerce has been merged with “Punjab National Bank”. No effort has been made to modify Form No.36. Under these facts, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby, dismissed for want of prosecution. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/03/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *Amit Kumar* Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard File Asstt. Registrar Jodhpur Bench