COMMY COMMERCIAL CO.,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(2), FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4540/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 November 2018AY 2010-113 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, citing ITAT Rules and various judicial precedents, inferred the assessee's lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was treated as unadmitted and dismissed.

What were the facts?

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

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of communication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules

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: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20/11/2018Pronounced: 20/11/2018

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 26.04.2018 of the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad relevant to assessment year 2010-11.

2.

In this case the Notice was sent to the assessee for hearing for today i.e. 20.11.2018 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10.

3.

On 20.11.2018, neither the assessee nor his Authorised Representative attended the hearing and also not filed any Application for adjournment or nor filed the fresh address before the Tribunal, hence, I am 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 his Appeal. 2 A.Y. 2010-11 Commy Commercial Co.

4.

Having regard to Rule 19(2) of the 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), I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I would like to clarify that subsequently, if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance 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 20.11.2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →