NOGLE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 18(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4552/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 November 2018AY 2014-153 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, finding no interest from the assessee in pursuing the appeal and citing non-appearance and undelivered notices, decided to dismiss the appeal. The dismissal is in limine, meaning it's at the outset without going into the merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. Notices sent to the assessee's registered address were returned undelivered with the remark 'No such person'.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and failure to provide a valid address for 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 27.02.2018 of the Ld. CIT(A), New Delhi relevant to assessment year 2014-15.

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.

However, the same was returned back with the postal remarks “No such person”.

3.

On 20.11.2018, neither the assessee nor her 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 2 A.Y. 2014-15 Nogle Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

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 her Appeal.

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 →