ABDUL WAHB, JAIPUR V. ITO WARD 5(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 865/JPR/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5470 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 22-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 20

Judgement Text

vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’SMC” JAIPUR Jh laanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.865/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Abdul Wahb 800, Taswir Walo Ki Gali, Bagru Walo Ka Rasta, Chandpole Bazar, Jaipur cuke Vs. The ITO Ward 5 (1) Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAUPA 7368P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 23/07/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 20/08/2024 vkns'k@ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 30-04-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18 raising grounds of appeal at Form No. 36. 2.1 During the course of hearing, it is noticed that none appeared on behalf of the assessee except filing an adjournment application on behalf of the ld. AR of the assessee through E-Mail expressing his inability to attend the case on the date of hearing. The Bench took into consideration the adjournment application but found 2 ITA NO.865/JP/2024 ABDUL WAHB VS ITO, WARD 5(1), JAIPUR that no specific reason has been mentioned therein by the ld. AR of the assessee for seeking adjournment. Hence, the adjournment application of the ld.AR of the assessee is rejected. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR was ready to argue the case. 2.3 After hearing the ld.DR and perusing the materials available on record, the Bench noted that the ld.CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. However, before the Bench, there is no written submission or any documentary evidence countering the order of the ld.CIT(A) has been filed by the ld. AR of the assesse. Hence, in this situation, the Bench has no other option except to confirm the order of the ld.CIT(A). Thus the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20 /08/2024. Sd/- (Sandeep Gosain) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 20 /08/2024 *Mishra vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Shri Abdul Wahb, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO , Ward 5 (1), Jaipur 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 865/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar