SHRI HARJIT SINGH RANDHAWA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -III (40, JALANDHAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 548/ASR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 December 2022AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine due to the deficiencies in the memorandum of appeal. The assessee was granted the right to revive the appeal upon removal of these deficiencies.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the ITAT and did not remove deficiencies in the memorandum of appeal despite reminders. The appeal was filed for the assessment year 2010-11.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal due to significant deficiencies in the filing. The substantive grounds of appeal regarding disallowances and additions were not adjudicated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

For Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Singla, Sr. DR
Hearing: 26.12.2022Pronounced: 27.12.2022
1.

None appeared for the assessee nor is any application regarding removal of the deficiency in the memorandum of appeal received.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. That the order of CIT(A) is against the law and facts of the case.

Harjit Singh Randhawa v. ITO 2. CIT(A) is wrong while disallowing opening cash in hand of Rs.100000 cash in hand which is from his personal statement of affair & gift from relatives.

3. CIT(A) is not justified while disallowing cash amounts to Rs.100000 as his mother mentioned that this amount is gift from her sources & attached bank statement for same.

4. CIT(A) is not justified while accepting AO addition of credit entries which are received by account payee cheques & fully explained.

5.

CIT(A) is wrong while accepting addition made by AO for grounds other than notice issued u/s 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961.

6.

CIT(A) fails to consider the fact that assessee is out of India & could not come to India due to some legal issues.

7.

Any other ground which may be raised at the time of hearing.

3.

The deficiency was informed to the assessee vide letter dated 31.05.2022 and subsequent reminder dated 10.06.2022, the appellant assessee has not removed the deficiencies and even not bothered to revise the Form 36 in the prescribed form.

4.

In view of the deficiencies in the memorandum of appeal filed by the appellant assessee, the subject appeal is not maintainable under law in order to adjudicate the grievance of the appellant. The appeal is dismissed in limine, however, the appellant assessee shall have the right to revive the appeal on removal of the deficiencies. Thus, the appeal is rejected as defective appeal.

Harjit Singh Randhawa v. ITO Order pronounced in the open court on 27.12.2022

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →