M/S. ENDEAVOUR INSURANCE BROKING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1116/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 November 2017AY 2012-132 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 notice sent to the assessee's address was returned as incomplete. Inferring a lack of interest from the assessee, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2012-13. However, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee during the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee due to non-representation and an incomplete address.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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 ‘D’ NEW DELHI

Before: SH.G.D.AGRAWAL, HON’BLE & SH.K.N.CHARYvs DCIT,

Hearing: 14.11.2017Pronounced: 14.11.2017

(ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13) vs DCIT, Endeavour Insurance Broking Pvt.Ltd., C/o-Pitamber Thakkar, Advocate, Circle-8(1), DDA Market, Kalkaji, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN-AABCE5722B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 14.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement 14.11.2017 ORDER PER G.D.AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT Challenging the order dated 04.01.2016 in Appeal No.346/2014-15 passing by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [in short “CIT(A)”]-3, Delhi for the AY 2012-13, the assessee filed this appeal.

2.

However, at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. In this matter when the notice was sent to the address given by the assessee, it was returned with the endorsement of the postal service that the address is incomplete. Since the assessee was sent to the address furnished by the assessee and the assessee does not furnish the complete address in the appeal memo, the non-service of notice in this matter is solely attributable to the conduct of the assessee and in these circumstances, we draw an inference that the assessee had no interest to persecuting this appeal, and the appeal is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. Support is drawn from the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of Multiplan India (P)

Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and order of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P).

3.

Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so deemed fit to pray for a recall of this order. The said order was pronounced on the date of hearing itself in the open Court.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 14th of November, 2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →