KAILASH CHAND BANGUR, Jaipur V. ITO, Kishangarh

ITA 858/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1810 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM RAI DCIT DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ (SMC) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, (SMC) JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 858 & 859/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12. SH. KAILASH CHAND BANGUR, KISHANGARH CUKE VS. ITO, KISHANGARH LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. ACYPB 0569 M VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM RAI (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 22.12.2017. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26/12/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM. THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDERS OF LD. CIT (A), AJMER DATED 18.07.2016 ARISING FROM PENALT Y ORDER PASSED U/S 271B, 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT RESPECTIVELY FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2011-12. 2. NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN T HE APPEALS WERE CALLED FOR HEARING. IT TRANSPIRES FROM RECORD THAT ON THE EAR LIER OCCASIONS THE LD. A/R OF THE ASSESSEE USED TO APPEAR AND TOOK ADJOURNMENT AS WEL L AS NOTED DOWN THE DATE OF HEARING. FURTHER, A NOTICE THROUGH RPAD WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE HEARING ON TODAY I.E. 22/12/2017. HOWEVER, THE SAID NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED BACK WITH POSTAL REMARKS THAT THE ADDRESSES HAS LEFT. THEREF ORE, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHEN NOBODY HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED, IT IS A PPARENT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING HIS APPEALS. IN THESE CIRCU MSTANCES, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF 2 ITA NO. 858 & 859/JP/2016 SHRI KAILASH CHAND BANGUR. DELHI BENCH OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLA N INDIA (P) LTD., (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKHOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (MP), THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMI SSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26.12.2017 . SD/- FOT; IKY JKO (VIJAY PAL RAO) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 26/12/2017. POOJA/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- SHRI KAILASH CHAND BANGUR, KISHA NGARH. 2. THE RESPONDENT THE ITO, KISHANGARH. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 858 & 859/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 3 ITA NO. 858 & 859/JP/2016 SHRI KAILASH CHAND BANGUR.