Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD & SHRI WASEEM AHMED
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–IV, Ahmedabad [CIT(A) in short] vide appeal no.CIT(A)-IV/0118/10-11 dated 28/11/2011 arising in the assessment order passed under s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 24/12/2010 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09.
This appeal was instituted in the month of April-2012 and thereafter appeal was adjourned several times at the request of the Ld.AR.
ITA No.201/RJT/2012 M/s. Jay Enterprise vs. CIT(A)-IV, Rajkot Asst.Year - 2008-09 - 2 - 3. Today, the Ld.AR moved an application for adjournment on the ground that AR of the appellant is travelling out of Rajkot on the appointed date on account of personal reasons and requested for adjournment.
We are not inclined to give the adjournment since 2012 onwards assessee has taken several adjournment, and on 17/01/2019, the Ld.AR cited the same reason that AR of the appellant is out of Rajkot on the said date and matter was adjourned for 25/02/2019. Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ram Siromani Tripathi & Ors vs. State of U.P. & Ors. in Civil Appeal Nos.9142-9144 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No.6156 of 2012 dated 07/02/2019 has held that if appellant’s counsel is not present in the court and stated to be out of station is not a ground to seek adjournment and adjournment application was rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and further held that Hon’ble Supreme Court has not found it to be a good ground for adjournment.
Since this recent judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court has come, therefore, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee on account of non- prosecution.
Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P)Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P.).
ITA No.201/RJT/2012 M/s. Jay Enterprise vs. CIT(A)-IV, Rajkot Asst.Year - 2008-09
Before parting, it would be appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there existed a reasonable cause for non- representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty, if so advised, to seek for a recall of this order.
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed in limine. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 27 /02/2019
Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 27/02/2019 ट�.सी.नायर, व.�न.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-IV, Rajkot 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण,राजोकट/DR,ITAT, Rajkot 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, राजोकट / ITAT, Rajkot 1. Date of dictation .. 25.2.19 (dictation-pad 5-pages attached at the end of this appeal-file) 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member …27.2.19 3. Other Member… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S…………….. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement…… 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S…….28.2.19 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk…………………28.2.19 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order………………