MR. DEEPAK SETHI,GURGAON vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3899/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 June 2017AY 2006-072 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 appeals were time-barred and the assessee was not interested in prosecuting them. Following established precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. Notices for hearing were sent to the assessee, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was an adjournment sought.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeals due to the assessee's non-appearance and the appeals being time-barred.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules

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.

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI O.P. KANT

O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM These appeal filed by the Assessee are directed against the separate Orders both dated 07.6.2014 of the Ld. CIT(A)-XXVIII, New Delhi relevant to assessment years 2006-07 & 2007-08 respectively.

2.

In these cases the Notices were sent to the Assessee for hearing by Regd. AD Post for today i.e. 06.06.2017 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10.

3.

On 06.06.2017, neither the assessee nor his Authorised Representative attended the hearing and also not filed any Application for adjournment by the Assessee, hence, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to serve the notice again and again to the assessee. In view of above, it is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of his Appeals. Even otherwise, the present Appeals are time barred by 29 days which has not been condoned by the Bench till date.

4.

Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd. : 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), we treat these appeals as unadmitted and dismiss the same. We would like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpose of adjudication of the Appeal.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →