Sh. Parkash Chand, Kangra V. Income Tax Officer, Palampur

ITA 728/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6788 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAWAN KUMAR SHARMASR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.728/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 SHRI PARKASH CHAND, VS. THE ITO, VPO LAMBAGAON, PALAMPUR. JAISINGHPUR, DISTT. KANGRA. PAN NO. ADEPC8183H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PAWAN KUMAR SHARMA,SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 26.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.10.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSA ILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 07.02.2017 OF CIT (APPEALS )-1 AMRITSAR CAMP AT PALAMPUR PERTAINING TO 2000-01 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE, DESPITE THIS , NO ADJOURNMENT REQUEST HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD NOR ANYONE WAS PR ESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NOTICE FOR THE SPECIFIC D ATE OF HEARING HAS BEEN SENT ADDRESS MENTIONED IN COLUMN NO. 10 OF FORM NO . 36 OF THE MEMO OF APPEALS ON 04.09.2017 WHICH HAS NOT COME BACK UNSERV ED. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT VARIOUS DEFECTS HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY IN THE PRESENT APPEAL WHICH TILL DATE, REMAINED NOT CURED. IN THE SE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. SUPPORT IS FROM THE ORD ER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LT D. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COUR T IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 48 0 (MP) ETC. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVE NTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON- REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBER TY TO PRAY FOR A ITA 728/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2000-01 PAGE 2 OF 2 RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER AND GIVING AN UNDERTAKING TO CURE THE DEFECT POINTED OUT BY THE REGIS TRY. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH OCT., 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.