M/s Lakhani Platinum Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad V. ACIT, Faridabad

ITA 5818/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6861 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 3
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B RAMANJANEYULU
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-3 NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-5818/DEL/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-11) LAKHANI PLATINUM LIFESTYLE PVT.LTD., PLOT NO.1340, SECTOR-14, FARIDABAD. PAN-AAECP0053F ( APPELLANT ) VS ACIT, CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD. (RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH.B.RAMANJANEYULU, SR.DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 29.04.2015 OF THE CI T(A), FARIDABAD PERTAINING TO 2010-11 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 TWICE. EVEN I N THE THIRD ROUND, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME AS NEITHER THE ASSESSEE IS REPRESENTED NOR THERE IS ANY ADJOURNMENT ON RECORD. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT T HE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 24.06.2016 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO.10, DESPITE THIS THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED TILL THE DATE O F PASSING OF THE ORDER. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE SAID NOTICE HAS NOT COME BACK UNSERVED. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSU ING THE PRESENT APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISS IONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND EST ATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). DATE OF HEARING 11.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17.10.2016 I.T .A .NO.-5818/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 17 TH OF OCTOBER, 2016. (DIVA SIN GH) JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI