SIEMENS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2209/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 September 2018AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal due to repeated non-appearance. The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Siemens Limited, filed an appeal against an order for assessment year 2011-12. The assessee failed to appear for multiple hearings despite notices being sent.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for want of prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for 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: HON’BLE, SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

For Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT DR
Hearing: 05.09.2018

Date of Hearing : 05.09.2018 Date of Order : 05.09.2018

O R D E R PER G.D. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT :

The appellant, M/s. Siemens Limited, by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 27.01.2015 passed by Ld. CIT (A)-41, New Delhi qua the assessment year 2011-12.

2.

In the present appeal, on 31.05.2018, the matter was adjourned to 05.09.2018 as none was present on behalf of the assessee. The notice for the next date of hearing i.e. 05.09.2018 was sent through RPAD but the appellant has not preferred to put in his appearance himself or through his authorized representative nor sent any request for adjournment. So, it is apparent on record that the appellant is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal.

3.

Keeping in view the legal position that mere issuance of notice does not amount to admission of appeal and this issue has been squarely decided by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the present appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the assessee to file an application to recall the order subject to demonstrate that he was prevented by sufficient cause from putting his appearance at the time of hearing.

4.

In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted. Order pronounced in open court on this 5th day of September, 2018 after the conclusion of the hearing.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →