Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI L.P. SAHU
ORDER PER SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals)-XXXI, New Delhi dated 31.07.2014 for AY 2011-12, challenging the levy of penalty u/s 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”).
Assessee has been notified the date of hearing through registered post, however, none appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeal. It, therefore, appears assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed un-admittedly. 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 by the revenue 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 revenue as un-admitted 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.
The assessee, if so desired, shall be free to move before Tribunal praying for recalling the order on explaining reasons for non-compliance etc.