M/s. SPB 87 Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 6271/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4196 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 05-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K SHARMA
• 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.-6271/DEL/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) SPB 87 HOTELS PVT.LTD., A-1, CC-COLONY, OPP. R.P.BAGH, NEW DELHI PAN-AALCS7171E ( APPELLANT) VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-12, NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE R EVENUE BY SH.A.K.SHARMA, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 28.09.2014 OF THE CI T(A)-XXXI, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2009-10 AY 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 DEFECT NOTICE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 24.04.2011 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO.10 REMAINED UNADDRESSED. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE A SSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY IN THE AB SENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDE R OF THE TRIBUNALS 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). 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. DATE OF HEARING 05.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21.10.2016 I.T .A .NO.-6271/DEL/2014 PAGE 2 OF 2 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 1 ST OF OCTOBER, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDI CIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI