M/S. SHYAM MEMORIAL WELFARE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, SONEPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4092/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 October 2017AY 2007-082 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 presumed that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeals due to their non-appearance. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed without a detailed examination of the merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals before the ITAT for AY 2007-08. However, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee during the hearing. The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee's representative.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to appear and prosecute their appeals before the Tribunal.

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: ‘G’ NEW DELHI

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

Hearing: 11.10.2017Pronounced: 11.10.2017

These two appeals by assessee have been directed against the order of CIT(A), Rohtak dated 08.05.2014 for AY 2007-08. However, at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the 2. assessee. In these circumstances, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeals and hence these appeals are dismissed in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of Multiplan India

I.T.A .No.-4092 & 4095/Del/2014 (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 appeals of the assessee are dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 11th of October, 2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →