PANASONIC INDUSTRIAL ASIA PTE LTD.,NOIDA vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6313/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 February 2019AY 2005-062 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal inferred that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal and decided to dismiss the appeal in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the appellant despite proper notice. No adjournment request was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-representation of the assessee during the hearing of their appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Before: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Hearing: 13.02.2019Pronounced: 13.02.2019

ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)- 43, New Delhi dated 22.09.2015 for the assessment year 2005-06.

2.

None was present on behalf of the appellant despite the notice for hearing was sent to the assessee through registered post at the address given in the appeal papers. No adjournment request has come on record before us. Therefore, it can be safely inferred that the assessee is not serious in pursuing its appeal. In the circumstances, the only alternative left with us is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of Tribunal in CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and of M.P. High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP).

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →