M/S. DEV CONSTRUCTIONS,DEHRADUN vs. ADDL. CIT, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4137/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 December 2018AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. The appeal was also found to be barred by limitation without a condonation application.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. No adjournment request or updated address was provided.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's non-appearance and failure to prosecute the appeal, coupled with a delay in filing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

ITAT Rules 19(2)

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 & SHRI O.P. KANT

O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 26.3.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A), Dehradun pertaining to assessment year 2010-11.

2.

In this case the Notice was sent to the assessee for hearing for today i.e. 04.12.2018 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10.

3.

On 04.12.2018, neither the assessee nor its Authorised Representative attended the hearing and also not filed any Application for adjournment or nor filed the fresh address before the Tribunal, hence, we are 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 its 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), we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. We further find that the appeal filed by the Assessee is barred by 16 days and at the time of filing the appeal the Defect Notice was issued. But till date no application for condonation of delay has been filed. We would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and rectify the defect as aforesaid and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpose of adjudication of the Appeal.

5.

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced on 04-12-2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →