SH. PREM SINGHEE,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5463/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 July 2018AY 2011-123 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 dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, citing the assessee's absence and lack of communication. The assessee was granted liberty to move for recalling the order if they could explain their non-compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the levy of penalty under Section 271AAA. The assessee was notified of the hearing date but did not appear, nor did they seek an adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for the hearing. The applicability of rules regarding non-appearance before the tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAA

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: ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI L.P. SAHU

Hearing: 19.07.2018Pronounced: 19.07.2018

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”).

2.

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.

3.

The assessee, if so desired, shall be free to move before Tribunal praying for recalling the order on explaining reasons for non-compliance etc.

More judgments on Section 271AAA

All 606 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →