M/s Krishna Goyal Hosiery Works, Ludhiana V. DCIT, Ludhiana

MA 43/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0689 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH GUPTA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH A , CHANDIGARH , !' #! $ % , &' BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM M.A.NO.43/CHD/2018 IN ITA NO.927/CHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) M/S KRISHNA GOYAL HOSIERY WORKS, 171-INDUSTRIAL AREA A, LUDHIANA. THE D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUDHIANA. ./PAN NO: AABFK2583K /APPELLANT /RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY : NONE / REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHISH GUPTA, CIT DR ! /DATE OF HEARING : 16.11.2018 '#$%&' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: .26.11.2018 &( /ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE APPLICANT FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 5.10.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 15.12.2017 BY POST AND WAS FIXED FO R HEARING ON 1.6.2018, 17.8.2018 AND FINALLY ON 16.11 .2018. ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 16.11.2018 NO NE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR ANY APPLICA TION WAS MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. SURPRISINGLY, THE ASSESS EE BY WAY OF THIS PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION, IS SEEKIN G RECALL OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL WHEREIN THE ITA NO.132/CHD/2016 A.Y.2007-08 2 APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION, AS THE HEARING WAS NOT ATTENDED TO, ON THE FIXED DATES. THE ASSESSEE HAS REPEATED ITS ACT OF NON ATTENDANCE OF HEARING ,IN THE HEARING OF THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AND HAS NOT EVEN CARED TO INTIMATE THE BENCH, THE REASON FOR NON ATTENDANCE, BY FILING AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. T HE FINDINGS OF THE ITAT IN THE QUANTUM ORDER, THEREFOR E, THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE SERIOUS IN PURSUING ITS APPEALS, STANDS REAFFIRMED BY THE ACT OF NON ATTENDANCE OF HEARING BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OW N MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED. MOREOVER, WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE APPLICATION FILED AND FIND THAT THE REASON FOR NON ATTENDANCE OF THE MAIN APPEAL ,AS MENTIONED THEREIN , IS THAT THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW OF THE HEARING FIXED ON 05-10-17 ONLY ON LATE EVENING HOURS OF 04-10-17 AND BEING OUT OF TOWN COULD NOT REACH FOR HEARING AND THE ASSESSEE ALSO NOT RESIDIN G IN CHANDIGARH COULD NOT REACH IN PERSON FOR SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. 3. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORDS AND FIND THAT THE NOTICE, FIXING THE HEARING ON 05.10.2017, WAS ISSUED BY THE ITAT REGISTRY ON 02.08.2017, ADDRESSE D TO THE ASSESSEE AT LUDHIANA. IT IS DIFFICULT, THERE FORE, TO BELIEVE THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE NOTICE AS LATE AS IN OCTOBER, I.E. DELAYED BY 2 MONTHS. AND IF THE ITA NO.132/CHD/2016 A.Y.2007-08 3 ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE NOTICE IN TIME, THERE CANNOT BE A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON ATTENDANCE IF THE COUNSEL WAS INFORMED LATE OF THE HEARING, SINCE THE ONUS WA S WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME. FOR THE SAME REASO N, SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS AWARE OF THE DATE OF HEAR ING WELL IN ADVANCE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY SUBSTANCE/MERIT IN THE CONTENTION THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PERSONAL LY APPEAR SINCE IT WAS RESIDING OUTSIDE CHANDIGARH. AL SO THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED, FOR SEEKING ADJOURNMENT ON 05.10.2017, DOES NOT MENTION THE ABOVE REASON, FOR SEEKING ADJOURNMENT, BUT STATES A TOTALLY DIFFERENT REASON. AS PER THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION DATED 04.10.2017, THE HEARING WAS SOUGH T TO BE ADJOURNED FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D NOT PROVIDED REQUISITE DETAILS TO THE COUNSEL FOR T HE HEARING ,SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN THE CITY . CLEARLY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN TAKING DIFFERENT STAN DS FOR NOT ATTENDING THE HEARING ON 05.10.2017, AND IT IS CLEAR THEREFORE THAT THERE WAS IN FACT NO REASON FO R NOT ATTENDING THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. THERE IS, THEREFORE, WE HOLD, NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER PASSED DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION SINCE IT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY HELD THEREIN THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS APPEALS. WE THEREFORE FIND NO MERIT IN THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION FILED AND DISMISS THE SAME. ITA NO.132/CHD/2016 A.Y.2007-08 4 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE APPLICANT IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- ' #! $ % (SANJAY GARG ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER &' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER )' /DATED: 26 TH NOVEMBER, 2018 * ! * (# )*+, +& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ((- ! / CIT 4. ((- ! ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. +./0 , ( (0' , 123/4 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. /35 / GUARD FILE (# ) ! / BY ORDER, 6 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR