GHANSHYAM TAK, Ajmer V. ACIT, Ajmer

ITA 714/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4840 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENDRA SINGH CIT DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR ] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 714 & 715/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 & 2011-12 GHANSHYAM TAK, PROP.- M/S PINKY MARBLE, NAYA BAZAR, NAYI BASTI, GULABBARI, AJMER. CUKE VS. A.C.I.T. CIRCLE-2, AJMER. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAKPT 0456 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE (DATE WAS NOTED) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 14/12/2016 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/12/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: KUL BHARAT, J.M. BOTH THE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISE A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 07/06/2016 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER FO R THE A.YS. 2009-10 & 2011-12. THE COMMON IDENTICAL GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMI NG THE RE-OPENING OF THE CASE U/S 148. THE SAME IS BAD IN L AW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. ITA 714 & 715/JP/2016_ GHANSHYAM TAK VS. ACIT 2 2. THAT THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 2,47,445/- CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A) BY WAY OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF INTEREST CLAIMED IS BAD IN LAW AND FACTS AND NEED TO BE DELETED. FURTHER ASSUMED INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 15% IS EXCESSIVE AS BANK FDRS FETCH INTEREST OF MAXIMUM 9%. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER BEING DATE WAS NOTED. WE NOTICED THAT VIDE ORDERSHEET ENTRY DATED 22/08/2016, REGISTRY HAS RECORDED OBJEC TION THAT THE PROOF OF PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEES IN ORIGINAL HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED. IT IS TRANSPIRED FROM THE RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO T REMOVED THE DEFECTS DESPITE A SPECIFIC OBJECTION RAISED BY THE REGISTRY . THEREFORE, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED BEING DEFECTIVE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH DECEMBER, 2016. SD/- SD/- HKKXPAN DQY HKKJR (BHAGCHAND) (KUL BHARAT) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 16 TH DECEMBER, 2016 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI GHANSHYAM TAK, AJMER. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2, AJMER. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT ITA 714 & 715/JP/2016_ GHANSHYAM TAK VS. ACIT 3 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 714 & 715/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR