Smt. Anita Gupta, Patiala V. ITO, Patiala

ITA 652/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5388 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J S NAGAR
• Assessee Lawyers: ADISH BAJAJ
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.652/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SMT.ANITA GUPTA, VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, # 61, WARD 6, GOOD EARTH COLONY, PATIALA. PATIALA. PAN : ADDPG9625K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ADISH BAJAJ RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J.S.NAGAR DATE OF HEARING : 15.01.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.01.2014 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PATIALA DATED 31.03.2010 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORD ER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ( 'THE A CT' FOR SHORT). 2. THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 15. 01.2014. THE ASSESSEE MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WHICH WAS REFUSED AS THE MATTER WAS FOUND TO BE COVERED. HOWEVER, ON PE RUSAL OF THE RECORD, IT TRANSPIRED THAT ON EARLIER OCCASION I.E. ON 08.1 0.2012 APPEAL WAS ARGUED BY ONE SHRI D.K.GOYAL AND AT THE TIME OF DIC TATION, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THERE WAS DELAY OF 729 DAYS. THE MATT ER WAS RELEASED FOR RE-HEARING. THEREAFTER, THE MATTER WAS FIXED ON VA RIOUS DATES BUT AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FROM DATE TO DATE AND WAS NOW FIXED FOR HEARING ON 15.01.2014. ON THE AP POINTED DATE OF 2 HEARING, AN APPLICATION WAS MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT O N BEHALF OF ONE SHRI K.P.BAJAJ. THE PERUSAL OF THE APPELLATE FOLDE R REFLECTS AN AFFIDAVIT BEING FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN WHICH IT HAS BEEN DE CLARED THAT SHE HAD FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) BUT ON ITS DISMISSAL, SHE WAS ADVISED BY ONE MR. MANOJ SHARMA, ADVOCATE THAT THE CHANCES OF SUCCESS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WERE VERY BLEAK AND THE APPEAL WHICH WAS DUE TO BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 10.06.2010 WAS NOT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. LATER ON, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT SHE WAS TOLD BY SHRI K.P.B AJAJ THAT THE APPEAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED AND THE CHANCES OF SUCCESS W ERE NOT BLEAK AND HENCE, THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 08.06.2012 BY POST I .E. AFTER A DELAY OF 729 DAYS. 13. ON THE PERUSAL OF THE SAID AFFIDAVIT FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FILE ANY EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO HER CONT ENTIONS, EXCEPT THE AFFIDAVIT, WHICH IS SELF SERVING AND CANNOT BE ACCE PTED. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS DISMISSED BEING FILED AFTER A DELAY OF 72 9 DAYS AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO JUSTIFY THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE APPEAL WHICH WAS DUE TO BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 10.06.2010 HAS EVENTUALLY BEEN FILED BY POST ON 08. 06.2012. THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE VIS--VIS THE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED IN-LIMINE. 14. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH JANUARY,2014. SD/- SD/- ( T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED: 20 TH JANUARY,2014 POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT,CHD.