SATPAL SINGH,VPO DHADDE vs. COMMISSIONER OF APPEALS, AMRITSAR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, which emanated from an assessment order under Section 143(3). The assessee or their authorized counsel failed to appear for hearings despite repeated calls and an adjournment request from an unauthorized counsel. The appeal was also found to be defective, with an unsigned memorandum, incorrect respondent details, and missing assessment order copy.
Held
The tribunal dismissed the appeal as infructuous due to the non-appearance of the assessee/authorized counsel and the unrectified defects in the appeal memorandum, which did not comply with Rule 47(1) of the IT Rules, 1962.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the non-appearance of the assessee/counsel and the significant unrectified defects in the appeal memorandum, leading to non-compliance with procedural rules.
Sections Cited
Section 143(3), Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 368/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Satpal Singh, Distt. Amritsar Vs. ITO, Ward 4(4), Punjab. Amritsar. [PAN:-BNCPS2657D] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR
22.01.2026 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 20.02.2026
ORDER Per: Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, passed u/s 250 of the Act, 1961 vide order dated 17.10.2023 which has emanated from the order of AO, Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Amritsar, passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 25.12.2018.
I.T.A. No. 368/Asr/2023 2 Assessment Year: 2011-12
There is no appearance by the assessee or his counsel on repeated calls neither physically or virtually. 3. An application for adjournment is filed via email by one Mr. Ashray Sarna (counsel for the assessee) seeking adjournment due to professional duties elsewhere, (but without any authorized power of attorney or vakalatnama on record). 3.1 It is seen that the POA on record is that of one Mr Harish Patney (Advocate) and there is no appearance by the said Advocate. 3.2 It is further pointed out by the registry that this appeal is “defective”, since the date of its filing on 17th December, 2023, in as much that the appeal memorandum and grounds of appeal, itself is unsigned and un verified and the Respondents name, address and designation is wrongly filled and copy of the assessment order has not been filed with the memo of appeal. 4. The above deficiency has been intimated to the assessee on various occasions through email harish_patney@yahoo.com as mentioned in form 36, but the said defect in the appeal memorandum is not yet rectified till this date of hearing. 5. It is seen from order sheet entries that adjournments has been sought earlier also by the counsel on 25th March, 2025, but there has not been any representation by the assessee and the deficiencies has not been removed till date.
I.T.A. No. 368/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year: 2011-12
The appeal memorandum before us is not complete in all respects, and is not as per provisions of Rule -47(1) of the I T Rules 62, and as such we dismiss the appeal as infructuous. 7. In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed .
Order pronounced on 20.02.2026 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963.
Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (UDAYAN DASGUPTA) Accountant Member Judicial Member AKV Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4)The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order
