2017 (7) TMI 1447 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee non-representation on the date of hearing - TDS u/s 194A - non-compliance of TDS provisions - default as per Sec 201(1)/ 201(1A) - HELD THAT - As it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal and hence the appeal is dismissed in limine. Support is drawn from the orde in the case of Multiplan India (P) Ltd 1991 (5) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-D and case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 1996 (3) TMI 92 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT In case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing it would be at liberty if so deemed fit to pray for a recall of this order. The said order was pronounced on the date of hearing itself in the open Court.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Appeal against order dated 10.09.2012 of CIT(A), Noida for A.Y. 2010-11.
2. Confirmation of treating the assessee in default under Sec 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Validity of reassessment order.
4. Quashing of the impugned assessment order.
5. Confirmation of treating the assessee in default for non-compliance of TDS provisions u/s 194A.
6. Dismissal of the appeal due to non-representation by the assessee.

Analysis:
(A) The appeal was filed against the CIT(A)'s order for the assessment year 2010-11, challenging the treatment of the assessee in default under Sec 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The grounds of appeal raised various legal and factual contentions regarding the actions of the assessing officer and the CIT(A).

(B) During the hearing, no representative appeared on behalf of the assessee, leading to the presumption that the assessee was not serious about pursuing the appeal. Citing precedents, the appeal was dismissed in limine. Reference was made to the decision of the Coordinate Bench of Delhi Bench of ITAT and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court to support the dismissal.

(C) The Tribunal, before concluding, mentioned that if the assessee could demonstrate a reasonable cause for non-representation during the hearing, they could request a recall of the order. This provision allowed the assessee an opportunity to present a valid reason for their absence and seek a review of the dismissal order.

(D) Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine due to the absence of representation by the assessee during the hearing. The order was pronounced in open court, emphasizing the finality of the decision taken on 19th April 2017.

This judgment highlights the importance of proper representation in legal proceedings and the consequences of non-appearance during hearings, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of the appeal in this case.