Shri Gulamnabi S.Vohra, Anand V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-1, Anand

MA 338/AHD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4190 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEETA SHAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF HEARING : 15/ 01/2010 DRAFTED ON: 15 /01/2010 MA NOS.338 & 339/AHD/2008 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.1530/AHD/08 & 1531/AHD/200 8 ) ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2003-04 & 2004-05 RESPECTIVELY SHRI GULAMNABI S.VOHRA PROP.SAMIR STATIONERY & CYCLE MARK MADNA PARK OPP.WATER WORK, ANAND VS. THE ITO WARD-1 ANAND PAN/GIR NO. : - (APPLLICANT) .. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: - NONE - REVENUE BY: SMT.NEETA SHAH, SR.D.R. O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: NONE PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ADJOURN MENT IS REJECTED BECAUSE OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS NOTED IN THIS O RDER. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. MA NOS.338 & 339/AHD/2008 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.1530/AHD/08 & 1531/AHD/08 ) SHRI GULAMNABI S.VOHRA VS. ITO ASST.YEARS 2003-04 & 2004-05 - 2 - 3. THE APPEALS WERE FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TR IBUNAL ON 23/10/2008 AND, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE, BOT H THE APPEALS WERE HEARD EX-PARTE AND THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED VID E ORDER 23 RD OCTOBER-2008. 4. THE ASSESSEE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED THAT ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON 23/10/2008, THE ASSESSEE SOU GHT ADJOURNMENT BECAUSE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE W AS GOING OUT OF STATION. IT IS ALSO STATED THAT INADVERTENTLY THE TRIBUNAL PASSED THE ORDER BY NOTING NON-PRESENCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSE E. WE, HOWEVER, FIND THAT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT CORRECT BECAUSE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDER ED THE REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT AND REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS REJECTE D. THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS REJECTED BY THE CONCERNED MEMBER IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT WOULD, THEREFORE, PROVE THAT AVERME NTS CONTAINED IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE FACTUALLY INCORRECT. NO OTHER POINT HAS TAKEN IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THERE MA NOS.338 & 339/AHD/2008 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.1530/AHD/08 & 1531/AHD/08 ) SHRI GULAMNABI S.VOHRA VS. ITO ASST.YEARS 2003-04 & 2004-05 - 3 - IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD. BOTH THE MISCEL LANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED. ORDER DICTATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND JANUARY-2010. SD/- SD/- ( N.S.SAINI ) ( BHAVNESH SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 22/01/2010 T.C. NAIR COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE. 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-VI, BARODA 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BENCH 6. THE GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR), ITAT, AHMEDABAD