M/s Ramgarhia Sabha (Regd.), Chandigarh V. ITO, Chandigarh

ITA 776/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6968 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO 776/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 M/S RAMGARHIA SABHA (REGD.), VS. THE ITO, RAMGARHIA BHAWAN, WARD 5(1), SECTOR 27, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN NO. AAATR3761K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : NONE (APPLICATION) DATE OF HEARING : 24.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.08.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 29.03.2017 OF LD. CIT (APPEALS)-2 CHANDIGARH PERTAI NING TO 2011-12 ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TI ME OF HEARING. THE APPEAL, ACCORDINGLY WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. DESPITE THIS, NEITHER THE ASSES SEE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. 2. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEA RING ON 22.06.2017 AND TILL DATE, NO POWER OF ATTORNEY HAS BEEN EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FA VOUR OF ANY COUNSEL. IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE A SSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. 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 WEALTH TAX COMMISSIO NER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENT ATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKIN G AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.08. 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