M/s Kerry Ltd., Ludhiana V. DCIT, Ludhiana

ITA 733/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6764 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 733/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S KERRY LTD., VS. THE DCIT, G.T.ROAD, CIRCLE-3, (WEST) JALANDHAR BYE PASS, LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN NO. AAACE3690D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING : 01.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.10.2017 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH,JM 1. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSA ILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2016 OF CIT(A)-1 L UDHIANA ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT WAS M OVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE NO ONE WAS PRESENT IN SUPPORT THEREOF, IT WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. IN THE THIRD ROUND ALSO, POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DEFECTIVE AS IT IS LATE BY 55 DAYS. DEFECT MEMO, AS PER RECORD, HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSE SSEE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION IN REGARD TO THE LATE FILING OF THE APPEAL, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALT H TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. ITA 733/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE E VENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE C AUSE FOR NON- REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBE RTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER AND GIVING AN UNDERTAKING TO CURE THE DEFECT POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09.10.2017. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA SIN GH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 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.