Sanjay Grover, Kangra V. DCIT, Palampur

ITA 844/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6964 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2017
• 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. 844/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SHRI SANJAY GROVER, VS. THE DCIT, PROP. M/S GROVER ENGINEERING CORP., CIRCLE, G.T. ROAD, MOHTLI, TEH-INDORA, PALAMPUR. KANGRA. PAN NO. AAOPG9365N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. CHANDER KANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 29.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.08.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 06.03.2017 OF CIT (APPEALS) PALAMPUR PERTAINI NG TO 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT AN ADJOURNMEN T HAD BEEN MOVED. EVEN IN THE PASS OVERS, NO ONE WAS PRESENT. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT IN THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT DEFECTS APART FROM THE DEFECT OF IN THE TRIBUNAL FEE. THE SAME REMAINS NOT CURED TILL DATE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY ATTEMPT BY T HE ASSESSEE TO ADDRESS THE SHORTCOMINGS POINTED OUT, GRANT OF ADJOURNMENT WOULD BE A WASTE OF GOVERNMENT TIME AND MACHINERY. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSE D 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 TH E CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 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-REPR ESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 RD AUG., 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,CH ANDIGARH.