M/S. NS PAPERS LTD.,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. DCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3616/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 March 2019AY 2011-124 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 dismissed the appeal for non-representation, presuming the assessee was not serious in pursuing it. The assessee may seek recall if a reasonable cause for non-representation is shown.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT. Notice for the hearing was sent to the assessee's address. However, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee on the scheduled date.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-representation by the assessee. The possibility of recalling the order if a reasonable cause is demonstrated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules 1963

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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.03.2019

Date of Hearing 06.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement 06 .03.2019 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 29/03/2016 of CIT(A)-Muzaffarnagar pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12 on the following grounds.

2.

However, at the time of hearing, no one was present. The records shows that notice to the assessee for the specific date of hearing has been sent on 1st February, 2019, at the address mentioned in Column No. 10 of Form No. 36 i.e. the memo of appeals filed. In the absence of any Representative or request for time on the said date, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. In view thereof considering Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules 1963 and following the precedent as laid down in Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) we dismiss the appeal for non representation. Support is drawn from Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). In the said case while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default the Hon’ble Court made following observations in their order- “If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference.”

3.

We hasten to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing then it may if so advised pray for a recall of this order and a restoration of its appeal if the assessee is able to show a reasonable cause for non representation on the specific date of hearing.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →