N.N. INTRATRADE SERVICES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 17(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3052/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 October 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 held that the non-service of notice was solely attributable to the assessee's conduct. Consequently, the Tribunal inferred that the assessee had lost interest in the matter.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but no representation appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notices sent to the assessee's provided address were not served, indicating a lack of communication from the assessee.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee due to their absence and non-representation during multiple hearings.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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: ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.D. AGARWAL & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY

Hearing: 3.10.2018Pronounced: 3.10.2018

ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. This is an appeal by the Assessee against the orders dated 23.02.2015 in Appeal No.68/13-14 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals),Faridabad (for short hereinafter called “Ld. CITA”).

2.

When the matter is called today, there is no representation for the assessee. On an earlier occasion, i.e. on 25.06.2018, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice is issued in this matter to the assessee to the address 2 furnished in Form No 36. When the notice is sent to proper address of the assessee as provided by them in Form No. 36 through Registered mail with postage prepaid, if the assessee was to be found therein, the notice would have been served. If for any reason the assessee is absent temporarily, it is for the assessee to make arrangement with the Postal Department either to deliver it to some other person, or to re-direct it to an address where the assessee could be found or to detain the mail till the assessee comes back and claims the same. Even if the assessee shifts from that place, it is for the assessee to notify the new address either to the Revenue or to the Tribunal or to the Postal Department. Obviously the assessee had not taken any of these steps and the non-service of notice in this matter is solely attributable to the conduct of the assessee.

3.

In these circumstances, we find no option, but to infer that the assessee lost interest in this matter, and we are left with no option but to hold that the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. We find support from the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del) wherein there was no representation for the appellant in the appeal filed before the Tribunal on the date of hearing, nor any communication for adjournment was received as to why the appellant had chosen to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the assessee as unadmitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. Respectfully following the said decision, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution.

4.

The assessee, if so desire, shall be free to move this Tribunal praying for recalling this order and explaining reasons for non-compliance etc.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →