DCIT, Muzaffarnagar V. M/s. Tayal Concast (P) Ltd, Muzaffarnagar

MA 67/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6910 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `FRIDAY E: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L.SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO.67/DEL/2011 (IN I.T.A. NO.1341/DEL/2009) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. TAYAL CONCAST PVT. LTD., DY. COMMISSIONER OF I.TAX, 321, SANJAY MARG, MUZAFFARNAGAR. VS. CIRCLE-I, MUZA FFARNAGAR. PAN: AABCT1327P (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : NONE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUNIL MISHRA, SR. DR. O R D E R PER C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH REFERENCE TO COMMON ORDER DATED 23.07.2010 PASSED B Y THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH `H, NEW DELHI IN T HE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY THE REVENUE. THE PRESENT MI SC. APPLICATION IS ONLY WITH REGARD TO THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEIN G ITA NO.1341/DEL/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2 2. IN THE MISC. APPLICATION IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED B Y THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT TAX EFFECT IN THE DEPART MENTAL APPEAL WAS `NIL I.E. BELOW RS.2,00,000/-, WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE TRIB UNAL WHILE PASSING THE ORDER. 3. NOTICE OF HEARING OF THIS MISC. APPLICATION WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE, FIRST FIXING THE CASE ON 1.07.2011 WHEN NONE FOR TH E ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT. A FRESH NOTICE FIXING THE MATTER ON 2.09.2011 WAS ISS UED ON 11.07.2011. THE FIRST NOTICE ISSUED ON 23.05.2011 FIXING THE MATTER ON 1 ST JULY, 2011 HAD RETURNED UN-SERVED WITH THE REMARK THAT CONCERNED A SSESSEE WAS NOT FOUND TRACEABLE AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN. THE NOTICE ISSUED ON 11.07.2011 HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UN-SERVED. THIS NOTICE WAS ALSO SENT AT T HE CARE OF ASSESSEES ADVOCATE, NAMELY, SHRI PREM PRAKASH OF MUZAFFARNAGA R, U.P. THESE NOTICES SENT WERE NOT RECEIVED UN-SERVED. IT IS, THUS, PRE SUMED THAT THE NOTICES HAVE BEEN SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE IN DUE COURSE OF TIME . 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL ON RECORD. IN THE MISC. APPLICATION, IT HAS NOT BEEN STATED AS TO HOW THE TAX EFFECT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL WAS `NIL I.E. BELOW RS.2,00,00 0/-. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY BASIS IN ACCEPTING THE ASSESSEES APPL ICATION AND HENCE, THE SAME IS REJECTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 6. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IMMEDIATELY AFTER T HE HEARING WAS OVER ON 2 ND SEPTEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (K.G. BANSAL) (C.L. SETHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2 ND SEPTEMBER, 2011. 3 MA NO.67/DEL/2011 (IN ITA NO.1341/DEL/2009) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.