PIYUSH JAIN,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(1), MUZAFFARNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4020/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 January 2019AY 2009-103 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 interested in pursuing the appeal. Following relevant rules and judicial precedents, the appeal was dismissed without adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2009-10 was scheduled for hearing. Neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor did they request an adjournment or provide a new address.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's non-appearance at the hearing and the subsequent dismissal of the appeal in limine.

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 H.S. SIDHU

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 24.4.2018 of the Ld. CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar relevant to assessment year 2009-10.

2.

In this case the Notice was sent to the assessee for hearing for today i.e. 01.01.2019 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10.

3.

On 01.01.2019, neither the assessee nor his Authorised Representative attended the hearing and also not filed any Application for adjournment or nor filed the fresh address before the Tribunal, hence, I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served to serve the notice again and again on the same address. In view of above, it is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of his Appeal.

4.

Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd. : 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpose of adjudication of the Appeal.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →