SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SUTHAR,CHURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, CHURU
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the adjournment applications due to the assessee's conduct and lack of valid reasons. The appeals were also dismissed in limine due to the delay in filing and the casual manner in which condonation was sought.
What were the facts?
The assessees filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The assessees repeatedly failed to appear for hearings and filed adjournment applications without sufficient reasons. There was also a delay in filing the appeals.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and delay in filing, without substantial reasons.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1528/JP/2018
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. These are the appeals filed by the two assessees against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur both dated 15/10/2018 for the A.Y. 2013-14.
2 ITA 1528 & 1527/JP/2018 _ Shri Magan Lal Suthar Vs ITO & 1 Anr 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic.
Common grounds have been raised in both these appeals, therefore, for the sake of convenience; a common order is being passed.
As a lead case, we take for the A.Y. 2013-14 for deciding the appeals. In this appeal, the grounds taken by the assessee are as under:
1. 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 5,00,650/- claimed on account of expenditure out of remuneration and other received from firm as a partner which is unwarranted and against the law and needs to be deleted.
2. The assessee craves the right to amend, alter or modify any grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing.”
5. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 22/02/2014 declaring total income of Rs. 6,62,772/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. Necessary notices were issued to him and finally, the assessment was completed U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) at a total income of Rs. 11,68,370/-.
3 ITA 1528 & 1527/JP/2018 _ Shri Magan Lal Suthar Vs ITO & 1 Anr 6. Being aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A), who after considering the submissions as well as material placed on record, upheld the action taken by the A.O.
Against the said order passed by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the ITAT on the grounds mentioned above.
Today when the case was called for hearing, no body appeared on behalf of the assessee rather an application for seeking adjournment has been filed. However, while going through the case file, we noticed that on 22/3/2021, adjournment application filed by the assessee was dismissed but in the interest of justice, the matter was fixed for 06/04/2021 for arguments. However, even on 06/04/2021, none had appeared on behalf of the assessee and only adjournment application was filed. Considering the interest of justice, another opportunity was granted to him. Thereafter, also none appeared on behalf of the assessee even in spite of availing several opportunities and even today another application for seeking adjournment was moved by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee wherein no specific reason has been mentioned. Therefore, considering the past conduct and also contents of the application, we found no 4 ITA 1528 & 1527/JP/2018 _ Shri Magan Lal Suthar Vs ITO & 1 Anr reasonable ground for adjourning the case, accordingly, the present application for seeking adjournment stands dismissed.
On the other hand, the ld DR is present in the court and is ready with the arguments, therefore, we have decided to hear the matter ex parte.
At the outset, we noticed that there is a delay in filing the present appeal before the ITAT and in this respect, an undated letter has been filed by the ld. AR which is not even signed by the assessee.
After having gone through the contents of the said letter, we find that no sufficient reasons have been mentioned by the ld. AR in seeking condonation of delay and moreover, no supportive evidences or affidavit has been filed in support of the said letter. Therefore, the said letter which is undated and not even signed by the assessee has been filed in a casual and cavalier manner, therefore, we depreciate the conduct of the assessee. Finding no sufficient cause in the said letter, we dismiss the request for seeking condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine.
Now we take for the A.Y. 2013-14. In this appeal, facts and circumstances of the case are identical to the facts and 5 ITA 1528 & 1527/JP/2018 _ Shri Magan Lal Suthar Vs ITO & 1 Anr circumstances of for the A.Y. 2013-14, therefore, our finding given in ITA No. 1528/JP/2018 for the A.Y. 2013-14 shall apply mutatis mutandis in this appeal also.
In the result, both these appeals of the assessees are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 09th September, 2021.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼foØe flag ;kno½ ¼lanhi x®lkÃa½ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 09/09/2021 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- (i) Shri Magan Lal Suthar, Churu. 1. (ii) Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Churu. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- I.T.O., Ward-2, Churu. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1528 & 1528/JP/2018) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
