2017 (7) TMI 1348 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee's Appeal Dismissed for Procedural Failures: Key Lesson on Compliance and Address Accuracy

Sh. Vijay Kumar Batra, Versus The D.C.I.T., Circle 3 (1), Chandigarh

The appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Chandigarh for the assessment year 2013-14 was ... Appeal dismissed as not admitted - HELD THAT:- In the acknowledgement-cum-notice certain defects have been pointed out by the Registry, which have been duly noticed by the representative of the assessee. The case was fixed for 30.5.2017. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite the date of hearing duly intimated in writing in the acknowledgement-cum-notice issued to the person, who has come in person to file the present appeal in the Registry. In the order-sheet entry dated 30.5.2017, it has been specifically noted down that the defects have not been removed by the assessee and the case was adjourned to 24.7.2017 i.e. for today. The notice issued to the assessee to appear on 24.7.2017 has been received back with the remarks of the Postal Authorities “insufficient address”. Neither any one has come present on behalf of the assessee, nor the defects have been removed and even the address of the assessee as provided in Column No.10 of Form 36 (Form of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal) is insufficient. Under these circumstances, the Memorandum of Appeal is rejected under rule 12 read with Rule 9 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. - Appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not admitted. Issues:Failure to appear in the appeal proceedings, Defects in the appeal documents, Rejection of the Memorandum of AppealAnalysis:The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Chandigarh for the assessment year 2013-14. However, despite the acknowledgment-cum-notice pointing out defects in the appeal documents, the assessee failed to rectify them. The case was scheduled for a hearing on 30.5.2017, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. The order-sheet entry noted the non-removal of defects and adjourned the case to 24.7.2017. The notice for the latter date was returned by the Postal Authorities citing an insufficient address. As no one represented the assessee, the defects remained uncorrected, leading to the rejection of the Memorandum of Appeal under rule 12 read with Rule 9 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.The failure of the assessee to address the defects and appear in the appeal proceedings resulted in the dismissal of the appeal as not admitted. The rejection of the Memorandum of Appeal was based on the non-compliance with the rules governing the filing and processing of appeals before the Appellate Tribunal. The insufficiency of the address provided in the appeal documents further contributed to the dismissal of the appeal. The decision to dismiss the appeal was made in the Open Court on 24.07.2017, emphasizing the importance of compliance with procedural requirements in legal proceedings.