VINEET KHATTAR,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4808/DEL/2018Status: PendingITAT Delhi11 February 2019AY 2014-153 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 held that the assessee's non-appearance indicated a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Following established precedents, the appeal was dismissed as un-admitted.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2014-2015. The assessee was notified of the hearing date but did not appear.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution by the assessee. The importance of effectively pursuing an appeal beyond mere filing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC” : DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI

Hearing: 11.02.2019Pronounced: 11.02.2019

For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 11.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 11.02.2019 ORDER This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad, Dated 06.02.2018 for the A.Y. 2014-2015.

2.

The assessee has been notified the date of hearing through registered post. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeal. It, therefore, appears that assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed as un-admitted.

2 ITA.No.4808/Del./2018 Shri Vineet Khattar, Faridabad.

3.

In view of the above and having regard to Rule 19(2) of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.); Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court decision in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), and also the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) wherein their Lordships held that “the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same”. In view of the above, respectfully following the aforecited decisions, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →