Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur

Shri Ashok Kumar Mantri , Kishangarh vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kishangarh on 19 December, 2017

              vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj
               IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
                    JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR

             Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k
           BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                  vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 568/JP/2017
                 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14
 Shri Ashok Kumar Mantri                  cuke   The ITO,
 S/o Kalyan Chand Mantri                  Vs.    Ward-1,
 Makrana Road, Industrial Area,                  Kishangarh.
 Madanganj, Kishangarh.

 LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAVPM6010F
 vihykFkhZ@Appellant                           izR;FkhZ@Respondent

      fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None
      jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT)

            lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 19/12/2017
            mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 19/12/2017

                             vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.04.2017 of ld. CIT(A), Kishangarhh for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

2. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing. It transpires from the record that notice sent through RPA has been received back with the postal remarks that the addressee has left without address. It is further noted that on the earlier occasion 2 ITA 568/JP/17_ Shri Ashok Kumar Mantri Vs. ITO the authorized representative of the assessee has appeared and took adjournment. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case when none has appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request of adjournment has been filed then it is apparent that the assessee is not interested in perusing and prosecution of the present appeal.

3. So in the circumstances, following the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., [1991] 38 ITD 320 and also on the judgment of the Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukhoji Rao Holkar Vs. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480, the appeal of the assessee is not admitted and is dismissed in limine for non prosecution as pronounced in the open Court on 19/12/2017.

Sd/-

¼ fot; iky jko ½ (VIJAY PAL RAO) U;kf;d lnL; @Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 19/12/2017 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzfs 'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Ashok Kumar Mantri, Kishangarh.
2. izR;Fkh@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward-1, Kishangarh.
3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT
4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A)
5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 568/JP/17) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar