M/s. Garima Credit Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 647/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4188 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 13 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: 06-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• 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.-647/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2003-04) GARIMA CREDIT HOLDING PVT.LTD., 7-E, JAWAHAR NAGAR, DELHI-110007. PAN-AABCG4153C ( APPELLANT) VS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE R EVENUE BY SH.ANIL SHARMA, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 18.11.2015 OF THE CI T(A)-15, DELHI PERTAINING TO 2003-04 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 NOTICE HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 29.07.2016 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO.10, DESPITE THIS THE SAID NOTICE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED . ACCORDINGLY, IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CAS E, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PR ESENT APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PETITION SEEKI NG TIME, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LI MINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJ IRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (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 06.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21.10.2016 I.T .A .NO.-647/DEL/2016 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