Ardent Buildwell India Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad V. ACIT, Faridabad

ITA 6821/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4577 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R C D AN DE

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH A BENCH NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 6821 /DEL./201 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 1 0 ARDENT BUILDWELL INDIA PVT. LTD. PIYUSH GLOBAL 1, PLOT NO. 5, YMCA CHOWK, NH - 2, MAIN MATHURA ROAD, FARIDABAD VS. A CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, FARIDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (PAN: AAFCA7783C ) ITA NO. 6822 /DEL./201 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 9 - 1 0 PIYUSH COLONISERS LTD. PIYUSH GLOBAL I, PLOT NO. 5, YMCA CHOWK, NH - 2, MAIN MATHURA ROAD, FARIDABAD VS. D CIT - II CENTRAL CIRCLE - II , FARIDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (PAN: AADCP7023J ) ITA NO. 6823 /DEL./201 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 9 - 1 0 PIYUSH INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD. 1 ST FLOOR, PIYUSH GLOBAL I, PLOT NO. 5, YMCA CHOWK, NH - 2, MAIN MATHURA ROAD, FARIDABAD VS. D CIT - II CIRCLE - II , FARIDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (PAN: AADCP9044P ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY: SH RI R.C. DANDE , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 04 /0 9 / 201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04 / 0 9 /201 7 PAGE 2 OF 4 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA , JUDICIAL MEMBER THE AFORESAID APPEAL S HA VE BEEN FILED BY THE ABOVE NAMED ASSESSEE AGAINST SEPARATE ORDER S OF EVEN DATE 11.9.2015 , PASSED BY L D . CIT (A PPEAL S ) - 3 , GURGAON IN RELATION TO THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) . 2. ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE CONNECTED APPEALS AS MUCH AS THE ISSUES INVOLVED ARE IDENTICAL ARISING OUT OF THE SIMILAR SET OF FACTS. 3. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS IT IS SEEN THAT THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH REGISTERED POST ON 16.8.2017 , FIXING THE DATE FOR TODAY , I.E., 4.9.2017. HOWEVER, TODAY WHEN CASE WAS CALLED OUT, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL; HENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE UN - ADMITTED AND DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: - (I). IN THE C ASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER 118 ITR 46 1 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. (II). IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKER VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS IN THEIR ORDER: IF THE PARTY AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION PAGE 3 OF 4 OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THIS COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE . (III). IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 ( D EL). THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL W HICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE / APPLICANT, NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY REVENUE CHOOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIB UNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWER TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UN - ADMITTED IN VIEW OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 4 . THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE, THE PRESENT APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NON - COMPLIANCE ETC. AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS ETC, THEN THIS ORDER SHALL BE RECALLED. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 / 0 9 /201 7 . S D / - S D / - ( R.K. PANDA ) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 04 / 0 9 / 2017 NARENDER COPY FORWARDED TO 1 . APPLICANT PAGE 4 OF 4 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT (A) 5 . DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI DATE DRAFT DICTATED ON 04 .0 9 .2017 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 0 4 . 0 9 .2017 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 7 . 9 .2017 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 7 .9.2017 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 7 . 9 .2017 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.