Sh. Amar Bahadur Gurung, Dehradun V. ITO, Dehradun

ITA 4342/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6789 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 01-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: F R MEENA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-4342/DEL/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2008-09) AMAR BAHADUR GURUNG, 78H DAKRA, GARHI CANTT., DEHRADUN-248001. PAN-AEPPG2366C ( APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-1(1), DEHRADUN. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE R EVENUE BY SH.F.R.MEENA, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 30.05.2014 OF THE CI T(A)-II, DEHRADUN PERTAINING TO 2008-09 AY ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. EVEN I N THE THIRD ROUND, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME AS NEITHER THE ASSESSEE IS REPRESENTED NOR THERE IS ANY ADJOURNMENT ON RECORD. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT T HE NOTICE HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 20.07.2016 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO.10, DESPITE THIS THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. IT IS FUR THER SEEN EVEN IN REGARD TO NOTICE FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 13.07.2016, TH E ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE PECULIAR FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE A SSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY IN THE AB SENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDE R 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 ITR 48 0 (M.P). 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 DATE OF HEARING 01.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26.10.2016 I.T .A .NO.-4342/DEL/2014 PAGE 2 OF 2 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 26 TH OF OCTOBER, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDI CIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI