SUMEET DHINGRA,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4), FARIDABAD
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as defective due to the assessee's non-compliance and lack of seriousness. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recall of the order if they cured the defects and explained the delay.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT but failed to appear for hearings and did not cure defects pointed out by the registry. The defects remained unaddressed despite multiple opportunities.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal can be dismissed for being defective due to non-compliance with procedural requirements and lack of representation.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: MRS. DIVA SINGH
Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing 03.02.2020 Date of 06.02.2020 pronouncement O R D E R The present appeal has been filed by the assessee wherein the correctness of the order dated 29.06.2018 of CIT(A)-Faridabad pertaining to 2015-16 assessment year is assailed.
However, at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was passed over despite this in the next round, the assessee still remained unrepresented.
On perusal of the record, it is seen that various defects have been pointed out by the Registry numbering seven in all on 12.09.2018 requiring the same to be addressed by the assessee. The record shows that the appeal came for hearing on 29.08.2019. The defect remained uncured. On a reading of the order sheet recording it is seen that it was put to the notice of the ld. AR that the assessee has not complied with the defect notice issued and last opportunity was granted. It is seen that no compliance has been made till date. It is seen that this deficiency as per Page 1 of 3 record was again pointed out to the assessee on 05.12.2019 when the appeal next came up for hearing. The defects remain. Accordingly, it is presumed that the assessee is not serious in the appeal filed. In view of these facts the appeal is dismissed as defective with the liberty to the assessee to pray for recalling of this order, in the eventuality, the assessee undertakes to cure the defects pointed out by the Registry and addresses the reasons for keeping the defects unattended right from 12.09.2018 till date. The Co-ordinate Bench may then consider the request in accordance with facts and law. Said order was pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as defective.
The order is pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself on 06th February, 2020.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026