Shri Yudhisthir N. Batra, Surat V. The ACIT, Circle-2, Surat

MA 85/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2242 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 05-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NIMESH YADAV SR DR

Judgement Text

, , , , D, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, D BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' !' !' !', , , , #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'(, , , , )* + ) ' )* + ) ' )* + ) ' )* + ) ' BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MA NO.85/AHD/2014 IN ITA NO.1801/AHD/2010 [ASSTT.YEAR 2003-2004] SHRI YUDHISTHIR N. BATRA PROP. RASHMI SILK MILL & DEEPIKA OVERSEAS B-3243, KOHINOOR MARKET RING ROAD, SURAT. /VS. THE ACIT, CIR.2 SURAT. ( (( (-. -. -. -. / APPELLANT) ( (( (/0-. /0-. /0-. /0-. / RESPONDENT) 1& 2 3 )/ ASSESSEE BY : NONE + 2 3 )/ REVENUE BY : SHRI NIMESH YADAV, SR.DR 5 2 &(*/ DATE OF HEARING : 5 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 678 2 &(*/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.09.2014 )9 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: BY THIS MA, THE ASSESSEE HAS REQUESTED FOR RECALLING OF THE EX PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, PASSED IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.1801/AHD/2010 FOR 2003-04 DATED 10.10.2012. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE MA. NOTICE SENT BY REGISTERED POST HAS COME BACK WITH T HE REMARK LEFT BY THE MA NO.85/AHD/2014 -2- POSTAL AUTHORITY. IN THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VI EW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING ITS MA. THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAST WAS ALSO NON-COOPERATIVE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF TH E MAIN APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE APPEAL ITSELF FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 1,258 DAYS. THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISCUSSED THE ISSUE OF COND ONATION OF DELAY AND ON MERITS FOUND THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL WA S NOT FOR ANY SUFFICIENT REASONS, AND THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED AS UN-ADMITTE D BECAUSE OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. IN THESE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE V IEW THAT THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE MA PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS ACCORDIN GLY DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MA PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( %&'( %&'( %&'( %&'( / ANIL CHATURVEDI) )* + )* + )* + )* + /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD