B.B.MODES, JODHPUR V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 546/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6274 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PUNAM RAI

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA. NO. 546/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 B.B. MODES 1/3 HATHROI MARKET, AJMER ROAD, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AABFB 6583 G VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SMT. PUNAM RAI (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 02/07/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/07/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), JAIPUR DATED 01.01.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING. THIS APPEAL WAS EARLIER LIS TED FOR HEARING ON 24.05.2018 BUT NONE HAD APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE, THEREAFTER, TO GIVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSE SSEE, THIS APPEAL WAS ITA NO. 546/JP/2016 B.B. MODES VS. ITO 2 ADJOURNED TO 02.07.2018 BUT NONE HAD APPEARED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING PROSECUTION OF THE PRESENT APPEAL. SO I N THE CIRCUMSTANCES, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF DELHI BENCH OF ITAT IN TH E CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., [1991] 38 ITD 320 AND ALS O ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE O F LATE TUKHOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480, THE APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO STATE THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL FILED, THEN IT WO ULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MOVIN G AN APPROPRIATE APPLICATION AND BY GIVING AN UNDERTAKING THAT IT SH ALL NOT ABUSE THE TIME OF THE TRIBUNAL. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/07/2018. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 24/07/2018. *SANTOSH VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- B.B. MODES, JAIPUR. ITA NO. 546/JP/2016 B.B. MODES VS. ITO 3 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- ITO, WARD- 2(3), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE { ITA NO. 546/JP/2016} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR