Mr. Amit Kumar Patharia, Delhi V. ITO, Ghaziabad

ITA 4869/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7233 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 03-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIMA BA RANWAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-II NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-4869/DE L/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-11) AMIT KUMAR PATHARIA, 211-A, PLOT NO.3, PUNA APARTMENT, I.P.EXTENSION, DELHI-110092. PAN-AJZPP7784N (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-1(1), GHAZIABAD (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE R EVENUE BY MS.ANIMA BARANWAL, SR. DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 28.05.2015 OF CIT(A) , GHAZIABAD PERTAINING TO 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR 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. EVEN IN THE SE COND ROUND, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. NEITHER ANYONE WAS PRESENT NOR A NY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE US. THE RECORD F URTHER SHOWS THAT THE NOTICE HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD ON 06. 06.2016 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO.10, HAS COME BACK WITH THE C OMMENT LEFT WITHOUT ADDRESS DESPITE THIS THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRE SENTED. IN THE AFORE- MENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR PETITIO N SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUI NG THE APPEAL FILED. 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 03.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30.08.2016 I. T.A .NO.-4869/DEL/2015 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 30 TH OF AUGUST, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUD ICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI