Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC
Before: SHRI BHAGCHAND
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 847/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke Professional Group Education Income Tax Officer, Vs. & Technical Development (Hd.Qrs.) (Exemptions) Society, Jaipur. 17, Gali No. 12, Queens Road, Ajmer Road, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTP 2723 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 16/01/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 17/01/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is the appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of the ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 31/10/2017 for the A.Y. 2012-13, wherein the assessee has raised sole effective ground of appeal, which is against confirming the demand of Rs. 15,02,650/-.
ITA 847/JP/2017_ 2 Professional Group Education Vs ITO
At the time of hearing, no one has appeared on behalf of the
assessee. The ld DR was heard.
The only issue involved in the appeal is confirming the demand of
Rs. 15,02,650/-. The ld. CIT(A) has dealt the issue by holding as under:
“4. The present appeal is against the assessment order of u/s 144/143(3) of the Act. I have carefully perused the grounds of appeal and the assessment order. As already discussed above, the appellant has failed to offer any explanation for submission in support of the grounds raised in this appeal nor any supporting evidences were produced by him despite adequate opportunity having been provided. In this connection, reliance may be placed upon the decision of the Hon'ble supreme court in the case of H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (1973) 90 ITR 271 wherein the Hon'ble court has held that he appellate authority cannot substitute its own judgment in place of the judgment of the A.O. unless it is shown that the judgment of the A.O. was biased, irrational, vindictive or capricious. In the instant case the appellant has not able to show that the decision of the A.O. was arbitrary, biased, irrational, vindictive or capricious without any basis, I find no reason to interfere with the decision of the A.O.”
After hearing the ld. DR has considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Bench find that none attended on behalf
of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) and before the ITAT at the time of
hearing. From this, it appears that the assessee is not interested to
ITA 847/JP/2017_ 3 Professional Group Education Vs ITO pursue its case. Therefore, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is hereby confirmed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17/01/2018.
Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@ ys[kk lnL;@ ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member ys[kk lnL;@ Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 17th January, 2018 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Professional Group Education & Technical 1. Development Society, Jaipur. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, (Hd.Qrs.) (Exemptions). 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. 847/JP/2017) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत