GST Plus - Get Daily updates,support, whatsapp Group & reply to GST Notices etc.!! Call : 011-411-70713 !!

ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Non appearance for proseqution after issuing notice under sec 143 & 142 than the assessement is to be done as per sec 144

LinkedIn


Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called for hearing nor any request for adjournment was filed. Even before the Assessing Officer[AO in short], none appeared while last notice dated 9.12.2010 issued u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act by the AO was refused by the secretary of the society and as a result, assessment was completed in the manner provided u/s 144 of the Act. In these circumstances, it , therefore, appears that the assessee is not interested in pursuing this appeal. Accordingly, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT [38 ITD 320] (Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT [(1996) 223 ITR 480 (MP)], this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed, in limine.

Citation :
M/s Aditya Siksha & Swasthya Samiti(Regd.)C/o Shri Suramveer Singh s/o shri Hari Singh, V&PO Ghasola, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani(Haryana) [PAN: AABTA6163B] (Appellant) Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward -1,HUDA Commercial Complex,Bhiwani-127021. (Respondent)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI

(BEFORE S/SHRI SHRI U.B.S.BEDI ,JM & A.N.PAHUJA, AM )

ITA no. 1667/Del/2012

Asstt. Year:- 2008-09

M/s Aditya Siksha & Swasthya

Samiti(Regd.)C/o Shri Suramveer

Singh s/o shri Hari Singh, V&PO

Ghasola, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri,

District Bhiwani(Haryana)

[PAN: AABTA6163B]

(Appellant)

Vs

 Income-Tax Officer,

Ward -1,HUDA Commercial

Complex,Bhiwani-127021.

 (Respondent)

Assessee by: None

Revenue by: Shri A.K.Singh, DR

Date of Hearing: 12-06-2012

Date of Pronouncement: 12-06-2012

O R D E R

A.N. PAHUJA:

 This appeal filed on 10.4.2012 by the assessee against an orders dated 28-11-2011 of the ld. CIT(A)-Rohtak for the Assessment Year 2008- 09 ,raises various grounds relating to denial of exemption for an amount of `95,046/- & `17,02,452/- u/s 10(23C)(iiiad)of the Income-tax Act,1961[hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’] besides addition of `13,13,806/- u/s 68 of the Act and disallowance of `1,87,000/- u/s 40a(ia) of the Act..

2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called for hearing nor any request for adjournment was filed. Even before the Assessing Officer[AO in short], none appeared while last notice dated 9.12.2010 issued u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act by the AO was refused by the secretary of the society and as a result, assessment was completed in the manner provided u/s 144 of the Act. In these circumstances, it , therefore, appears that the assessee is not interested in pursuing this appeal. Accordingly, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT [38 ITD 320] (Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT [(1996) 223 ITR 480 (MP)], this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed, in limine.

                                                             Sd/-                      Sd/-

                                                      (U.B.S.Bedi)       (A.N. Pahuja)

                                                   Judicial Member   Accountant Member

New Delhi

Copy of the order forwarded to:

The Assessee/ITO Ward 1-,Bhiwani/ The CIT concerned/ CIT(A)- Rohtak/DR/ Guard file

By order

Deputy Regist rar of ITAT, New Delhi Bench

 

CS Bijoy
on 22 June 2012
Published in Income Tax
Views : 1716
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags