Nitaben Shaileshbhai Patel… vs ITO | ITAT Ahmedabad 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Dev, Sr.D.R

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-5, Ahmedabad (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 06.02.2018 arising in the assessment order dated 24.10.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2010-11.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant- assessee. Case file reveals that the Registry has already sent an RPAD notice dated 12.07.2018 to assessee. None appeared for assessee on

ITA No. 987/Ahd/18 [Nitaben S. Patel vs. ITO] A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 - earlier occasion also without any intimation. In the aforementioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time, it can be presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. 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.).

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, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed in limine. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 17/09/2018

NITABEN SHAILESHBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD

Cases cited in this judgment