KSS PETRON P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT TDS CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

During hearing, none was present for the assessee. It is noted that these appeals were filed on 17/06/2014 and on the date of hearing i.e. 17/07/2016, the appeals were adjourned to 01/02/2017 for non- appearance of the assessee. Registered AD notice was issued. On 01/02/2017 also, one more opportunity was provided as non-appeared for the assessee. On 15/06/2017, the authorized representative requested for 18/10/2017. On 18/10/2017 also, nobody appeared for the assessee and the appeal was adjourned to 15/01/2018. Today i.e. 04/06/2018, neither anybody appeared for the assessee nor moved any adjournment petition. It seems that the assessee has nothing to say. The Ld. DR even pointed out before the First Appellate Authority also, the assessee did not appear in spite of sufficient opportunity provided to the assessee for which our attention was invited to para-2 of the impugned order.

2.1. We have considered the submissions of Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the TDS statement was analyzed by the Assessing Officer, wherein, the default of non-payment of TDS amount deducted/low deduction of TDS at the prescribed rate was found. The assessee was asked to show cause for such a default. The Ld. Assessing Officer assessed the assessee and directed to pay the total tax liability. On appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) in spite of sufficient opportunities provided to the assessee, dismissed. Before us also, the assessee did not bother to attend. Therefore, in the absence of any explanation by the assessee, both the appeals are dismissed. However, it is made clear that if on a later date, the assessee moves application and justifies its non-appearance, the Bench is free to recall the order and may decide on merit.

अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु�त,(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai