PUSHPANJALI HOSPITALITY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 20(2), NEW DELHI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee appeared to be no longer interested in pursuing the appeal. Following established precedents, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite prior adjournment and notice. No application for adjournment was filed.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for hearings.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide 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.
- CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.2,267 citing38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
- Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT2,040 citing223 ITR 480 · 1997 · HC
- CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another1,656 citing118 ITR 461 · 1997 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC” : DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI
ORDER This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-7, New Delhi, Dated 08.01.2018, for the A.Y. 2013-2014.
On the last date of hearing the appeal was adjourned as none appeared on behalf of the assessee and a notice has been issued to the assessee duly intimating the date of hearing. However, even today i.e., on 03.12.2018, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking for adjournment has been filed. It, therefore, appears that 2 ITA.No.2050/Del./2018 M/s. Pushpanjali Hospitality Private Limited, New Delhi. assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the appeal. The appeal of assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed.
In view of the above and having regard to Rule 19(2) of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.); Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court decision in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP), and also the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) wherein their Lordships held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same. Respectfully following the same, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as un-admitted.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026