VIKRAM OVERSEAS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3470/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 October 2018AY 2004-053 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 held that the assessee was no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal due to non-appearance. Following established precedents, the appeal was dismissed as un-admitted.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) for AY 2004-2005. The assessee was notified of the hearing date twice but did not appear.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution by the assessee. The importance of effectively pursuing an appeal beyond mere filing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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: ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Respondent: Shri Md. Gayasuddin Ansari
Hearing: 23.10.2018Pronounced: 23.10.2018

M/s. Vikram Overseas Ltd., E-44/3, Okhla Industrial The ACIT, Circle-17(1), Area, Phase-II, New Delhi. vs. C.R. Building, PIN – 110 020. New Delhi. PAN AAACV0028L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : -None- Revenue by: Shri Md. Gayasuddin Ansari, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 23.10.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 23.10.2018 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-9, New Delhi, Dated 23.03.2015, for the A.Y. 2004-2005, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

2 ITA.No.3470/Del./2015 M/s. Vikram Overseas Ltd., New Delhi. 2. The assessee has been notified the date of hearing twice by Registered Post. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. It, therefore, appears that assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the appeal. The appeal of assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed.

3.

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.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

3 ITA.No.3470/Del./2015 M/s. Vikram Overseas Ltd., New Delhi. Order pronounced in the open Court.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →