PRADEEP MDALMIA & SONS,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-55(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2849/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 December 2018AY 2014-152 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 was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, following established legal principles and case laws.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was scheduled for hearing, but the assessee did not appear, nor did they file any adjournment request. The tribunal had sent a notice of hearing via registered post.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. The tribunal had to decide whether to proceed with the appeal despite the assessee's absence.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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 “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.D.R

O R D E R The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 26.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XIX, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

The appeal was fixed for hearing before the Bench on 20.12.2018. But none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee through Registered Post on 07/08/2018 but none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment filed. The law aids those who are vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights. This principle is embodied in well known dictum "vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt".

3.

Under these circumstances, in my considered opinion, the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. I, therefore, hold that this appeal is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard, place reliance upon following case laws:-

1. 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H) 4. CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee And Another, 118 ITR 461(SC).

4. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited above, dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 20th December, 2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →