Naresh Kumar Singhal & Sons, Faridabad V. ITO, Ward-2(1), Faridabad

ITA 5586/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3015 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES SMC : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.5586/DEL./2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 M/S. NARESH KUMAR SINGHAL & SONS, PROP. M/S. KRISHNA STEEL CORPORATION, H.NO.114, SECTOR-21C, FARIDABAD. PAN AACHN5647N VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : -NONE- FOR REVENUE : SHRI S.L. ANURAGI, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 27.02.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.03.2019 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), FARIDABAD, DATED 1 ST MARCH, 2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 2009. 2. IN THIS CASE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED THE EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 144/147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CO-OPERATE AT ASSESSMENT STAGE AND NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BILLS/VOUCHERS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, 2 ITA.NO.5586/DEL./2018 M/S. NARESH KUMAR SINGHAL & SONS, FARIDABAD. THEREFORE, MADE ADDITION OF RS.25,04,252/- ON ACCOUNT OF NON-GENUINE PURCHASES. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), DESPITE SEVERAL NOTICES ISSUED FOR HEARING OF THE APPEAL. ADJOURNMENT WAS ALSO SOUGHT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS GRANTED. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CO-OPERATE WITH THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED THE DATE OF HEARING THROUGH REGISTERED POST. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE WAS THROUGHOUT EX-PARTE BEFORE A.O. AS WELL AS BEFORE LD. CIT(A). IT, THEREFORE, APPEARS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AND FOLLOWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL INCLUDING THAT OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL.); HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF ESTATE 3 ITA.NO.5586/DEL./2018 M/S. NARESH KUMAR SINGHAL & SONS, FARIDABAD. OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), AND ALSO THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORECITED DECISIONS, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UN-ADMITTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DELHI, DATED 05 TH MARCH, 2019 VBP/- COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R. ITAT SMC BENCH, DELHI 6. GUARD FILE. // BY ORDER // ASSISTANT REGISTRAR : ITAT DELHI BENCHES : DELHI.