M/s. Gian Sagar Educational and Charitable Trust, New Delhi V. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 483/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4034 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 25-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NAVEEN CHANDRA
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWANI TANEJA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Condonation of delay
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 483/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 M/S GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL VS. CIT, CENTRAL-III AND CHARITABLE TRUST, NEW DELHI C/O M/S RRA TAXINDIA, D-28, SOUTH EXTENSION, PART-I, NEW DELHI 11 0049 (PAN: AAATH5827B) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. ASHWANI TANEJA, ADV. REVENUE BY : SH. NAVEEN CHANDRA, CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.3.2013 OF THE LD. CIT (CENTRAL)-III, NEW DELHI R ELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 PASSED U/S. 263 OF THE INC OME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS THE ACT). 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AR E NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEAT ED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, SH. ASHWANI TANEJA, ADVO CATE/ LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION D ATED 09.10.2017 2 AND STATED THAT HE IS WITHDRAWING HIS POWER OF ATT ORNEY FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATION AND REQUESTED THAT APPROPRIATE ORDERS MAY BE PASSED IN THE CASE. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJEC TION ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS AND ALSO GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEES COUNSEL IN THE APPLICATION DATED 09.10.2017, FILED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE CONTENTS OF THE APPLICATIO N DATED 09.10.217 FILED BY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE, SH. ASHWA NI TANEJA, ADV. IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- SUB: REQUEST FOR WITHDRAWAL OF POWER OF ATTORNEY I N THE CASE OF GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRU ST FOR A Y 2008-09 IN ITA NO. 48312014. THE ABOVE SAID CASE IS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE YOU R HONOURS FOR TODAY I.E. 09.10.2017. IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT IN THE ABOVE SAID CASE, ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING WE WERE DIRECTED TO FIL E THE CONDONATION PETITION EXPLAINING THE DELAY IN FILING THE AFORESAID APPEAL. IN THIS REGARD, WE HAVE TRIED OUR BEST TO ESTABLISH THE CONTACT WITH THE SAID CLIENT. IT IS LEARNT THAT THE COLLEGE BEING RUN BY THE SAID SOCIETY HAS BEEN CLOSED, NO S TAFF IS LEFT. WE ARE NOT ABLE TO ESTABLISH ANY CONTACT W ITH ANY PERSON SO FAR AND NO CONDONATION PETITION HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO US SO FAR. FURTHER, WE HAVE ALSO N OT 3 BEEN PROVIDED ANY MORE INFORMATION AS WELL AS REQUIRED TO US TO PREPARE THIS CASE PROPERLY. AS SU CH, WE ARE FINDING OURSELVES HELPLESS TO REPRESENT THIS CASE BEFORE THE HON'BLE BENCH. THEREFORE, IN THIS W E WISH TO WITHDRAW OUR POWER OF ATTORNEY. IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE HON'BLE BENCH MAY PROCEED BY CONTACTING DIRECTLY WITH THE SAID ASSESS EE, OR AS MAY BE CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE BY THE HON'BLE BENCH IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. WE MAY KINDLY BE PERMITTED TO WITHDRAW OUR POWER OF ATTORNEY IN THIS CASE. WE SHALL BE HIGHLY OBLIGED. YOURS FAITHFULLY, FOR GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST SD/- (AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE) 5.1 WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL WAS FILED ON 28.01.20 14 AND THE REGISTRY HAS ISSUED DEFECT MEMO DATED 30.01.2014 P OINTING OUT THE DEFECT THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BAR RED BY LIMITATION FOR 248 DAYS. WE NOTE THAT TILL TODAY I.E. 09.10.2017 THE SAID APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING BEFORE THE BENCH MANY TIMES FRO M 07.1.2016 TO 09.10.2017, BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY APPL ICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 248 DAYS. 5.2 KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO ADJOURN THE MATTER FURTHER AND ISSUE NOTICE TO TH E ASSESSEE FOR REMOVING DEFECT AND ALSO DUE TO THE FACT THAT ASSES SEE REMAIN NON- 4 COOPERATIVE WITH ITS COUNSEL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISM ISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BEING TIME BARRED FOR 248 DAYS. HOWE VER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE GIVING LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSE E, IF SO ADVISED, MAY MOVE AN APPLICATION FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER, AFTE R RECTIFYING THE DEFECT WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD, AS PER LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 09/10/2017. SD/- SD/- [L.P. SAHU] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 09/10/2017 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES