ADITYA TELELINK PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 966/JPR/2017Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 February 2018AY 2006-075 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the case and applied the principle that laws assist the vigilant. Consequently, the appeals were treated as not admitted and dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed against the CIT(A)'s order. Notices sent to the assessee were returned unserved, and no one appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Tribunal or the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be dismissed in limine due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of seriousness in pursuing the case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 966 to 968 & 1007/JP/2017

Hearing: 08/02/2018Pronounced: 08/02/2018

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 966 to 968 & 1007/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2010-11 to 2012-13 cuke Aditya Telelink Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., 1st Floor, Somani Building, Vs. Central Circle-1, M.I. Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAECA 9522 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None (Notice returned unserved) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 08/02/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 08/02/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BENCH

These are the appeals filed by the assessee emanates from the composite order of the ld. CIT(A)-4, Jaipur dated 11/09/2017 for the

A.Ys. 2006-07 and 2010-11 to 2012-13. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- Grounds in ITA No. 966/JP/2017 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in not allowing the assessee company to represent its case before him by ignoring the principles of natural justice and therefore making ex party order of confirmation of order passed by learned AO.

ITA 966 to 968 & 1007/JP/2017_ 2 Aditya Telelink P Ltd. Vs DCIT

2.

Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in law as well as facts in confirming the order passed by the Ld. DCIT, Central Circle -1, Jaipur of wrongly disallowing legitimate membership Expenses and subscription fees of clubs amounting to Rs. 3,00,000/- by treating it the personal expenses of directors of assessee company and not allowable business expenditure.

3.

That the Appellant assessee craves for a leave to add, alter and amend any Grounds of appeal at the time of appellate hearing.

Grounds in ITA No. 967/JP/2017 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in not allowing the assessee company to represent its case before him by ignoring the principles of natural justice and therefore making ex party order of confirmation of order passed by learned AO.

2.

Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in law as well as facts in confirming the order passed by the Ld. DCIT, Central Circle -1, Jaipur of wrongly making the following disallowances:

(i) Disallowed the entire farm house maintenance expenses amounting to Rs 2,20,420/- by treating it as personal leisure expenses of directors or their families of assessee company and not for business purpose.

(ii) Disallowed legitimate membership Expenses and subscription fees and charges paid to clubs amounting to Rs 7,10,087/- by treating it the personal expenses of directors of assessee company and are not allowable as business expenditure.

3.

That the Appellant assessee craves for a leave to add, alter and amend any Grounds of appeal at the time of appellate hearing.

Grounds in ITA No. 968/JP/2017 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in not allowing the assessee company to represent its case before him by ignoring the principles of natural

ITA 966 to 968 & 1007/JP/2017_ 3 Aditya Telelink P Ltd. Vs DCIT

justice and therefore making ex party order of confirmation of order passed by learned AO.

2.

Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in law as well as facts in confirming the order passed by the Ld. DCIT, Central Circle -1, Jaipur of wrongly making the following additions:

(i) Ld. A.O. disallowed the entire farm house maintenance expenses amounting to Rs 2,10,413/- by treating it as personal leisure expenses of directors of assessee company or their families using farm house for leisure purpose and alleging that expenditure incurred on such farm is not for the purpose of business of the company. Therefore, such expenses are disallowed.

(ii) Ld. A.O. disallowed legitimate membership Expenses and subscription fees of clubs and credit card expenses to the extent of Rs. 22,657/- by treating it the personal expenses of directors of assessee company and are not allowable as business expenditure.

(iii) Ld. A.O. has wrongly added the exempted LTGC of Rs. 6,05,518/- arising from the compulsory acquisition of agriculture land, by alleging that the land acquired by NHAI is not the agriculture land but a normal capital asset and therefore, the long term capital gain arising from this land should be charged to tax.

3.

That the Appellant assessee craves for a leave to add, alter and amend any Grounds of appeal at the time of appellate hearing.

Grounds in ITA No. 1007/JP/2017 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in not allowing the assessee company to represent its case before him by ignoring the principles of natural justice and therefore making ex party order of confirmation of order passed by learned AO.

ITA 966 to 968 & 1007/JP/2017_ 4 Aditya Telelink P Ltd. Vs DCIT

2.

Under the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned CIT(A) 4, Jaipur has grossly erred in law as well as facts in confirming the order passed by the Ld. DCIT, Central Circle -1, Jaipur of wrongly making the following additions:

(i) Ld. A.O. has disallowed the entire farm house maintenance expenses amounting to Rs 1,87,357/- by treating it as personal leisure expenses of directors of assessee company or their families using farm house for leisure purpose and not for business purpose.

(ii) Ld. A.O. had disallowed legitimate annual rediffmail expenses of Rs. 6,200/-, credit card membership fees of Rs. 1,323/- and other payment of clubs expenses amounting to Rs. 1,11,155/- by treating these expenses as the personal expenses of directors of assessee company and are not allowable as business expenditure.

3.

That the Appellant assessee craves for a leave to add, alter and amend any Grounds of appeal at the time of appellate hearing.

2.

The notice sent by the Tribunal to the last known address of the

assessee returned unserved. The assessee has not intimated the change

of address. At the time of hearing, no one has appeared on behalf of the

assessee. It is also noted that none attended on behalf of the assessee

before the ld. CIT(A). From this, it shows that the assessee is not

serious to pursue his case.

3.

The laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep

over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum

‘’VIGILANTIBUS NON DORMENTIBUS, JURA SUBVENIUNT’’. Considering

the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the

ITA 966 to 968 & 1007/JP/2017_ 5 Aditya Telelink P Ltd. Vs DCIT Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, as were considered in 38 ITD 320

(Delhi) in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Ltd., and also Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP), we treat the appeals

as not admitted and dismissed in limine.

3.

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08/02/2018. Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; iky jko½ ¼Hkkxpan½ (VIJAY PAL RAO) (BHAGCHAND) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 08th February, 2018 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Aditya Telelink Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The D.C.I.T., Central Circle-1, Jaipur. 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. 966 to 968 & 1007/JP/2017) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →