Shri Hitesh K. Shah, Ahmedabad v. The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(2),, Ahmedabad

ITA 1155/AHD/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 06-08-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 115520514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AGSPS5269F
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1155/AHD/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
Appellant Shri Hitesh K. Shah, Ahmedabad
Respondent The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(2),, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 06-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 06-08-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 30-07-2010
Next Hearing Date 30-07-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 15-04-2010
Judgment Text
- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH B AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI MUKUL KUMAR SHRAWAT JM AND D.C.AGRAW AL AM SHRI HITESH K. SHAH 29 SUNVILLA ROWHOUSE GURUKUL ROAD MEMNAGAR AHMEDABAD. PANAGSPS 5269F VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2) AHMEDABAD. (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY :- NONE. REVENUEBY:- SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN SR.DR O R D E R PER D. C. AGRAWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XXI AHMEDABAD DATED 15/3/2010 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROU NDS:- (1) LD. CIT(A)-XXI ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS BY DISPOSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A PENALTY ORDER OF RS.55 739/- PASSED BY THE LD. ITO. (2) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE FACTS THAT IN COME HAS NOT ACCRUED DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2005-06. FURTHER THE SAME IS TAKEN AS INCOME IN THE YEAR OF RECEIPT AND OFFERED FOR TAX ON WHICH TAX IS PAID AT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE. (3) THE LD. CIT(A) XXI HAS ERRED IN FACTS & LAW BY STAT ING THAT HE IS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION SO FAR HE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SAME. THE SAID ORDE R DOES NOT STATE THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION. ITA NO.1155/AHD/2010 ASST. YEAR :2006-07 2 (4) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED OUR SUBMISSION DA TED 15/3/2010 WHEREIN WE HAVE STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID TAX IN A LATER YEAR AT THE HIGHEST APPLICABLE RATE EVEN BEFORE THE SAID FACT WAS NOTICED OR INQUIRED INTO BY THE LD. AO AND HENCE NO LOSS OF REVENUE FOR DEPARTMENT. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS SERVED HOWEVER ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATI ON HAS BEEN FILED. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT VERY SERIOUS IN PURS UING THE APPEAL. NO DEFINITE REASON FOR APPEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL H AS BEEN GIVEN. WE ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE REASON FOR ADJOURNMENT. HENC E THE APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT IS REJECTED. THEREFORE FOLLOWING THE D ECISION OF ITAT DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL) WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMI NE. 3. IN THE RESULT THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 30/7/2010 SD/- SD/- (MUMUL KR. SHRAWAT) (D.C.AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R AHMEDABAD DATED : 30/7/2010 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 3 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD