Smt. Yasmeen, Saharanpur V. ITO, Saharanpur

ITA 5043/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6350 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-05-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAGAN SOOD
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-5043/DEL/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2006-07) SMT. YASMEEN, D/O-MASOON AHMED, MOH. SHAHMADAR, NEAR PUL JOGIAN, SAHARANPUR-247001. PAN-ACAPY3287F (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-1, SHAHARANPUR (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. GAGAN SOOD, SR. DR ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 19.01.2011 OF THE CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR PERTAINING TO 2006-07 ASS ESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT, NO ONE W AS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. NEITHER ANYONE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE. THE REC ORD FURTHER SHOWS THAT THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT DEFECT WHICH TILL DATE HAS NOT BEEN CURED. IT IS SEEN THAT THE NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 20.03.20 14 AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO-10. THE LAW ASSISTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND THE ASSESSEES NON-REPRESENTATION IN THE BACKGROUND DISCUSSED CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PR ESENT APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSION ER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI 2 I.T.A .NO.-5043/DEL/2011 PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). IN THE SAID CASE WHILE DIS MISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THE HONBLE COURT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS IN THEIR ORDER- IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENC E, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 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 THEN IT MAY IF SO ADVISED PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND DECISIONS ON MERITS. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISM ISSED IN LIMINE. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07 TH OF MAY 2014. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:- 07/05/2014 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGI STRAR ITAT NEW DELHI