HARYANA PETROCHEMICALS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 958/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 September 2018AY 2006-073 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 noted that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Following established legal precedent, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Haryana Petrochemicals Ltd., filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A). Despite multiple notices sent via RPAD, the assessee failed to appear before the tribunal for the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee before the tribunal for the hearing of their appeal.

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 ‘C’ : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI N.K. SAINI & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

For Respondent: Smt. Meeta Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 05.09.2018

PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

The appellant, M/s. Haryana Petrochemicals Ltd., by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 22.12.2014 passed by Ld. CIT (A)-4, New Delhi qua the assessment year 2006-07.

2.

In the present appeal, notice was sent through RPAD to the assessee for hearing on 12.06.2018 and the case 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 also 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. 5. In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted. Order pronounced in open court on this 05th day of September, 2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →