Shri Navin N Patel, Baroda V. The Dy.CIT.,Central Circle-1, Baroda

ITSSA 308/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3568 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DINESH SINGH
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, A , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.(SS) NO.308/AHD/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) NAVIN N PATEL, 22-23, ROKADNATH SOCIETY, RACE COURSE, BARODA-390007 / VS. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA # ./ $ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : ACXPP6848G ( #% / APPELLANT ) .. ( & #% / RESPONDENT ) #% ' / APPELLANT BY : NONE & #% ( ' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI DINESH SINGH, SR.DR )* ( + / DATE OF HEARING 31/01/2018 ,-./ ( + / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31/01/2018 0 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTAN CE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AHMEDABAD [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 06/05/2014 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR(S) (AY) 2006-07 & 2007-08 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT- ASSESSEE. THE REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS EARLIER ENTERTAINED. HOWEVER, IT(SS) NO.308/A HD/2014 NAVIN N. PATEL VS. DCIT ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 2 - THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO APPEAR ON THE APPOINTED DATE WITHOUT ANY INTIMATION. IT WAS THE BOUNDEN DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO EITHER APPEAR OR INFORM THE TRIBUNAL FOR NON-ATTENDANCE. THE ASSESS EE HAS FAILED TO DO SO. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES OF THE CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSE SSEE OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LE FT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE . SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P)LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). 3. BEFORE PARTING, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE EXISTED A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY, IF SO ADVISED, TO SEEK FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED IN LIMINE . THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 31/ 01/ 2018 SD/- ( ) ( ) ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 31/01/2018