SHRI HARJINDER SINGH SANDHU,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, PHAGWARA

Non attended. The adjournment application filed by the assessee council is found devoid of merits and hence, it is rejected. This is old appeal of 2018 and therefore, it is decided to hear the Ld. DR and decide the appeal on facts of the case.

Heard the ld. addl. CIT DR and perusal of the record. We found that despite several opportunity of being heard given to the assesse non attended on the date of hearing and adjournment applications have been filed seeking adjournment on the ground that the assessee has filed a complaint against the bank authorities in the civil court of sub divisional judicial magistrate Phillaur which are still awaited for framing charge. On the present date of hearing, the Ld. AR Sh. Rakesh Joshi has again filed similar adjournment application dated 22nd August 2023 stating therein that the assessee appellant has filed a complaint under section 409, 420465, 467, 468, 471, 500, 120-B, 34 of IPC against the bank and its employees, where the account in his name was operated upon by some other person, in the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Phillaur which is pending for disposal. The next date of hearing in the said complaint is given for 25th August 2023 for consideration for framing of charge. Accordingly, he requested for further adjournment of the hearing till the disposal of the said complaint by the court of the honourable SDJM, Philluar.

Considering the peculiar facts of the case that a complaint under section 409, 420465, 467, 468, 471, 500, 120-B, 34 of IPC is filed by the appellant against the bank and its employees, where he alleged that the account in his name was operated upon by some other person, in the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Phillaur which is pending for framing charge and disposal there of which may take many years for that appeal can be kept in abeyance by adjournments. In view of that matter, we consider it deem fit that the appellate proceedings in the captioned appeal of assessee may be abated till the date of disposal of the complaint of the appellant by the SDJM, Phillaur. Accordingly, the captioned appeals and abated with the right/permission to appellant to revive its appeals before the Tribunal on the decision of the SDJM, Phillaur. At the same time, the department has right to realise the demand out of the assets of the appellant assessee.

In the backdrop of the above discussion, the captioned appeal is disposed of in the terms indicated above.