The Ayali Kalan Co-op Agriculture Multi, Ludhiana V. Income Tax Officer W III (3), Ludhiana

ITA 880/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6736 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGHDR
• Assessee Lawyers: NONEAPPLICATION REJECTED

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 880/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 10-11 THE AYALI KALAN COOP AGRICULTURE VS. THE ITO, MULTI-PURPOSE SOCIETY LTD. WARD 3(3), VPO AYALI KALAN, LUDHIANA. DISTT. LUDHIANA. PAN NO. AAAAT3941Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE(APPLICATION REJECTED) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH,DR DATE OF HEARING : 02.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.10.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILIN G THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 27.05.2016 OF CIT (APPEALS )-1 LUDHIANA PERTAINING TO 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLIC ATION WAS PLACED ON RECORD. CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT ON THE LAST DATE O F HEARING ALSO, IT WAS ADJOURNED ON THE WRITTEN REQUEST OF THE COUNSEL I.E. ON 0 6.07.2017, THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE SECOND PASS OVER GIVEN ALSO N O ONE WAS PRESENT IN SUPPORT OF THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. THE RECORD SHOW S THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 03.08.2016 AND HAS COM E UP FOR HEARING ON ALMOST TEN DIFFERENT OCCASIONS. ON EACH OF THE DATES, THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING, EXCEPT FOR THE DATES ON WHICH THE BENCH WAS NO T FUNCTIONAL, IT HAS BEEN ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT ON 03.10.2016, 26.10.2016, 07.11.2016, 19.12.2016, 30.01.2017, 14.02.2017, 31.05.20 17 AND 06.07.2017. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES GRANT OF ANY MORE TIME TO THE ASSESSEE, IT APPEARS, WOULD BE A WASTE OF GOVERNMENT TIME AND MACHINERY. ACCORDINGLY, RELYING UPON ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECIS ION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS ITA 880/CHD/2016 A.Y. 2010-11 PAGE 2 OF 2 WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC., THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AND THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION MOVED IS REJECTED. 3. IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEA L FILED, IT MAY GIVE AN UNDERTAKING OF ITS INTENTIONS AND EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR ADJOURNMENT. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT SELF. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH OCTOBER,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.