SATPAL SINGH,VPO DHADDE V. COMMISSIONER OF APPEALS, AMRITSAR

ITA 368/ASR/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Satpal Singh against the order of the CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, which was based on the earlier order by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Amritsar. The appeal was dismissed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, due to procedural deficiencies in the appeal documents. The tribunal highlighted the absence of the appellant and his counsel during the hearings and noted that the defects in the appeal memorandum were not corrected despite several communications.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837689 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHARAN DASS
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 368/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Satpal Singh, Distt. Amritsar Punjab. [PAN:-BNCPS2657D] (Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward 4(4), Amritsar. (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 20.02.2026 ORDER Per: Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, passed u/s 250 of the Act, 1961 vide order dated 17.10.2023 which has emanated from the order of AO, Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Amritsar, passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 25.12.2018. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 368/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 2 2. There is no appearance by the assessee or his counsel on repeated calls neither physically or virtually. 3. An application for adjournment is filed via email by one Mr. Ashray Sarna (counsel for the assessee) seeking adjournment due to professional duties elsewhere, (but without any authorized power of attorney or vakalatnama on record). 3.1 It is seen that the POA on record is that of one Mr Harish Patney (Advocate) and there is no appearance by the said Advocate. 3.2 It is further pointed out by the registry that this appeal is “defective”, since the date of its filing on 17th December, 2023, in as much that the appeal memorandum and grounds of appeal, itself is unsigned and un verified and the Respondents name, address and designation is wrongly filled and copy of the assessment order has not been filed with the memo of appeal. 4. The above deficiency has been intimated to the assessee on various occasions through email [e-mail] as mentioned in form 36, but the said defect in the appeal memorandum is not yet rectified till this date of hearing. 5. It is seen from order sheet entries that adjournments has been sought earlier also by the counsel on 25th March, 2025, but there has not been any representation by the assessee and the deficiencies has not been removed till date. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 368/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 3 6. The appeal memorandum before us is not complete in all respects, and is not as per provisions of Rule -47(1) of the I T Rules 62, and as such we dismiss the appeal as infructuous. 7. In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed . Order pronounced on 20.02.2026 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (UDAYAN DASGUPTA) Accountant Member Judicial Member AKV Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4)The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order Printed from counselvise.com "