Sh. Suraj Motors Pvt. Ltd, Jammu V. The Income Tax Officer, Srinagar

ITA 88/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5629 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

ITA NO.88 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEAR: 2012-13 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR (SMC) BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.88(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-13 SURAJ MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED. JCB HOUSE, SARORE ADDA, SARORE (BARI- BRAHMANA) JAMMU-181133 PAN:AAGCS-0861A VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3), SRINAGAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE. RESPONDENT BY: SH. RAHUL DHAWAN (DR.) DATE OF HEARING: 20.04.2017 DATE OF PRONO UNCEMENT: 21 ST APRIL, 2017. ORDER PER DIVA SINGH: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A ND AS PER THE MEMO OF APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), JAMMU, PERTAINING TO 2012-13 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GR OUNDS. HOWEVER, THE APPEAL FILED ON 08.02.2017 IS DEFECTIVE. INTIMA TION OF THE DEFECTS HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 22 TH FEB.2017. TILL DATE THE DEFECT REMAINS NOT CURED. NOTICE FOR SPECIFIC DATE OF HEAR ING WAS ISSUED ON 21 ST MARCH, 2017, WHICH HAS NOT CAME BACK UNSERVED. APAR T FROM THE OTHER DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY, IT IS SEEN THA T EVEN THE COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS NOT BEEN FILED. THUS WHERE DESPI TE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE THE ASSESSEE REMAINS UNREPRESENTED, AS NO ON E WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT HAVE BEEN CAUSED TO BE CURED IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PU RSUING THE APPEAL FILED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER, IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 [2013] (DEL.). ITA NO.88 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEAR: 2012-13 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IN CASE TH E ASSESSES IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED LIBERTY IS GIVEN TO PR AY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER ON THE ASSESSEES UNDERTAKING THAT THE ASSESS EE SHALL CURE THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST APRIL, 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER /PK/PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER