K.Mohan, Cuddalore V. ITO, Cuddalore

ITA 528/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6165 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-03-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURU BHASHYAM
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, C HENNAI . . . , ! '# , $ !%' !& BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / I.T.A. NO.528/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI K. MOHAN, BLOCK NO.20, LOWER ANAICUT MILK SUPPLY, CUDDALORE-607 803 [PAN: AJCPM 4273 C] ( #' /APPELLANT) VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-I(2), CUDDALORE ( ()#' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GURU BHASHYAM, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 22-05-2014 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22-05-2014 %* / O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M: THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IMPUGNING THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-VI , CHENNAI DATED 30-12-2013 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (A Y) 2008-09. I.T.A. NO. 528/MDS/2014 2 2. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY. 2008-09 ON 31-07-2008 ADMITTING INCOME OF ` 2,45,600/-. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE U/S. 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 28-11-2008. DESPITE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE AS SESSING OFFICER VIDE ORDER DT.16-12-2010 WAS CONSTRAINED TO MAKE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT U/S.144 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESS EE CHOSE NOT TO APPEAR BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER DESPITE SEVERAL NOTICES. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSE E PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). EVEN BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR DESPITE S EVERAL OPPORTUNITIES. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEA LS) SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN AS MANY AS FOURTEEN OPPORTUN ITIES TO APPEAR AND REPRESENT HIS CASE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESS EE FOR THE REASONS UNEXPLAINED DID NOT APPEAR. THE CIT(APPEAL S) VIDE ORDER DT.30-12-2013, DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE . I.T.A. NO. 528/MDS/2014 3 3. EVEN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, NO ONE IS PRESENT ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE OF THE APPEAL WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH REGISTERED POST WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE (RP AD) ON 18-03-2014. DESPITE SERVICE, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AR HAS APPEARED. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERE STED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. THE A SSESSEE HAS BEEN CALLOUS THROUGHOUT IN NOT PURSUING HIS CASE. LAW DOES NOT COME TO THE RESCUE OF THOSE WHO LAY IN SLUMBER AND ARE NEGLIGENT IN PURSUING THEIR CAUSE. HENCE, FOLLOWING THE DECI SION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA P. LTD., REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480) , WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PRO SECUTION. 4. THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO FILE AN APPLICATIO N BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR RESTORATION OF HIS APPEAL AND HEARING ON MERITS BY SHOWING REASONABLE CAUSE FOR ITS FAILURE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE FIXED. THE TRIBUNAL, IF SATIS FIED, MAY RECALL ITS ORDER AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER FOR HEARING ON MERITS. I.T.A. NO. 528/MDS/2014 4 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON THURSDAY, THE 22 ND MAY, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( ! '# ) (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) (VIKAS AWAS THY) '#$ / VICE PRESIDENT % &' / JUDICIAL MEMBER (% /CHENNAI, )& /DATED: 22 ND MAY, 2014 TNMM &* +,-, /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ./0 /CIT(A) 4. . /CIT 5. ,12 3 /DR 6. 245 /GF