Vijay Kumar Jain, Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 6242/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6779 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 07-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRINCE MOHAN SINHA; RAJEEV K DEORA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-6242/DEL/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011-12) VIJAY KUMAR JAIN, 621/9, VISHWAS NAGAR, (CHOWK 18 QRT), SHAHDARA, DELHI-110032. PAN-AAAPJ0874D ( APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-29(2), NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SH.RAJEEV K.DEORA, ADV. & SH.PRINCE MOHAN SINHA, ADV. REVENUE BY SH.ANIL SHARMA, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 12.09.2014 OF THE CIT(A)-XXV, NE W DELHI PERTAINING TO 2011-12 ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT P ETITION WAS MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE LD.AR PLEADING INABILITY TO ARGUE AS HE WAS OUT OF STATION. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NO POWER OF ATTORNEY HAS BEEN FILED ON B EHALF OF THE COUNSEL SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE COUNSEL S OUGHT AN ADJOURNMENT ON 30.08.2016 WHICH WAS GRANTED AND IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE DEFECT POINTED BY THE REGISTRY ON 23.04.2015 TILL DATE HAS NOT BEEN C URED. THE LD.AR WAS UNABLE TO ADDRESS THE POSITION. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NOTICE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE HAS COME BACK UNSERVED WITH THE COMMENT IS PATTE PE IS NAAM SE KOI VYAKTI NI HAI, ATTAH WAPAS ON 31.05.2016. THUS, WHERE NEITHER DEFECT I S CURED NOR THE NOTICE IS BEING RECEIVED AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT AUTHORIZED ANYON E TO APPEAR FOR HIM NOR CHOSEN TO APPEAR, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS DATE OF HEARING 07.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28.10.2016 I.T.A .NO.-6242/DEL/2014 PAGE 2 OF 2 IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 48 0 (M.P). THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE OPE N COURT. 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 28 TH OF OCTOBER, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SIN GH) JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSI STANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI