SMT. KSHAMA GOYAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1988/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 February 2017AY 2011-122 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 assessee was not present for the hearing and had not requested an adjournment. Therefore, the Tribunal presumed the assessee was not serious about pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2011-12. Despite the appeal being listed for hearing multiple times, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee before the Tribunal for the hearing of the appeal.

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: ‘SMC-I’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH

Hearing: 07.12.2016Pronounced: 06.02.2017

Assessee by None Revenue by None Date of Hearing 07.12.2016 Date of Pronouncement 06.02.2017 ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 11.02.2016 of CIT(A)-10, New Delhi pertaining to 2011-12 assessment year on various grounds.

2.

However, at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was passed over twice. In the third round also, the position remained the same neither the assessee was present nor any request for adjournment has been moved. The record shows that on the last date of hearing i.e. 09.11.2016 it was adjourned on the written request of the assessee. It is seen that notice for the date of hearing was sent for the specific date of hearing to the assessee on 16.08.2016 at the address mentioned in column No.10 in the memo of appeal filed. It is further seen that it has not come back un-served. In these circumstances, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal and the appeal is dismissed in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P).

3.

Before parting it is appropriate to 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 advised to pray for a recall of this order. The said order was pronounced on the date of hearing itself in the open Court.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →