Sh. Chander Jain, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 745/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7605 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH.L.P.SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-745/DEL /2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009- 10) CHANDER JAIN, S/O-LATE.SH. DAL CHAND JAIN, 4682, GALI UMRAO SINGH, PAHARI DHEERAJ, NEW DELHI-110006. PAN-ABZPJ6595M (APPELLANT) VS ACIT, CIRCLE-39(1), NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH.SUMIT LAL CHANDANI, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SH . MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 03 .0 5 .2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09 .0 6 .2016 O R D E R PER SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAIL ING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 26.09.2013 OF CIT(A)-XXVIII, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2009-10 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING TIME TO OBTAIN DOCUMENTS AND FILE A PAPER BOOK. THE LD.AR WAS REQUIRED TO RESPOND WHY THE APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE DI SMISSED AS THE DEFECT POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY ON 01.09.2014 IN REGARD TO THE APPE AL FEE REMAINS NOT CURED. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL HAS CAME UP FOR HEARIN G ON 13.01.2016 ON WHICH IT WAS ADJOURNED ON THE ASSESSEES REQUEST. 3. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY RESPONSE, THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST WAS REJECTED AS NON- CORRECTION OF THE DEFECT TILL DATE MAY BE ON THE GR OUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS I.T.A .NO.-745/DEL /2014 PAGE 2 OF 2 IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. HOWEVER, WE HASTEN T O ADD THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. THE AS SESSEE, IF SO ADVISED MAY PRAY FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER BY DEMONSTRATING THAT CORRECTIV E STEPS FOR CURING THE DEFECT ARE TAKEN. IN SUCH AN EVENTUALITY, THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH CONSIDERING THE PETITION IF SO MOVED, IF SO SATISFIED THAT THE DEFECTS HAVE BEEN CURED MAY RECALL THIS OR DER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED IN LIMINE. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 OF JUNE, 2016. SD/- SD/- (L.P.SAHU) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSIS TANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI