M/s Sunrise Industries, Solan v. DCIT, Circle, Parwanoo

ITA 1181/CHANDI/2017 | 2013-2014
Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 118121514 RSA 2017
Assessee PAN ABFFS9767G
Bench Chandigarh
Appeal Number ITA 1181/CHANDI/2017
Duration Of Justice 4 month(s)
Appellant M/s Sunrise Industries, Solan
Respondent DCIT, Circle, Parwanoo
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 28-11-2017
Last Hearing Date 31-10-2017
First Hearing Date 31-10-2017
Assessment Year 2013-2014
Appeal Filed On 28-07-2017
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES SMC CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1181/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 M/S SUNRISE INDUSTRIES VS. THE DCIT VILLAGE-BALYANA P.O.KASAULI CIRCLE DISTT. SOLAN (HP). PARWANOO. PAN :ABFFS9767G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 31.10.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.11. 2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 23.05.2017 OF LD. CIT (APP EALS) SHIMLA PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESENT O N BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. DESPITE A PASS OVER TWICE THE ASSESSEE REM AINED UNREPRESENTED AS NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS PLACED ON RECORD NOR A NYONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RECORD ALSO SHOWS THAT NOT ICE DATED 12.10.2017 FOR THE SPECIFIC DATE OF HEARING HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASS ESSEE AT THE LOCAL ADDRESS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO. 10 OF TH E MEMO OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS NOT COME BACK UNSERVED. ACCORDINGLY SERVICE IS DEEMED TO BE COMPLETE. 3. IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE SERIOUS IN PURS UING THE APPEAL FILED. SUPPORT IS FROM THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DELHI BENCHES IN TH E CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE SHRI TUKO JI RAO HOLKAR VS WEALTH TAX COMMISSIONER 223 ITR 480 (MP) ETC. 4. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN THE EVE NTUALITY THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE C AUSE FOR NON- REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO P RAY FOR A ITA 1181/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 2 RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MAKING AN APPROPRIATE PRAYER. SA ID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.11. 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH.