M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, MANSOORPUR,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6109/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 December 2018AY 2011-123 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 observed that the appellant was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Cane Development Council, filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A). Notice was sent for the hearing date, but the appellant neither appeared nor requested an adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for the hearing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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 ‘D’ : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI A.N.MISSHRA

For Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Hearing: 13.12.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N.MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6109/Del./2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Cane Development Council, vs. DCIT Mansoorpur , C/o. DS Kohli, Adv. Circle-1 F-06, 1st Floor, Narayan Tower, Gandhi Lane, Golghar Gorakhpur Uttar Pradesh Muzaffarnagar PAN : AAALC0282C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSED BY : None REVENUE BY : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13.12.2018 Date of Order : 13.12.2018 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

The appellant, Cane Development Council, Mansoorpur by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 25/06/2014 passed by Ld. CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar qua the assessment year 2011-12. 2. In the aforesaid appeal, notice was sent through RPAD to the assessee for hearing on 17/09/2018 and the case was adjourned to 13/12/2018. The next date of hearing i.e. 13/12/2018 was informed to both the parties in the open court, but the appellant has not preferred to put in his appearance himself or through his authorized representative nor sent any request for adjournment. So, it is apparent on record that the appellant is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal.

3.

Keeping in view the legal position that mere issuance of notice does not amount to admission of appeal and this issue has been squarely decided by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the present appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the assessee to file an application to recall the order subject to demonstrate that he was prevented by sufficient cause from putting his appearance at the time of hearing.

4.

In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted for want of prosecution. Order pronounced in open court on this 13th day of December, 2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →