BISHAN PARKASH,HARYANA vs. CIT, HISAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3269/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 January 2017AY 2009-103 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 held that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the Commissioner of Income-tax. Notices for hearing were sent to the assessee via registered post with acknowledgment due, but the assessee did not appear or send a representative.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance after receiving due notice.

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 ‘A’ : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

For Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, Senior DR
Hearing: 11.01.2017

(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri S.K. Jain, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 11.01.2017 Date of Order : 12.01.2017 O R D E R

PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

The appellant, Shri Bishan Parkash, by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 30.03.2014 passed by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hisar qua the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

In the present appeal, notice was sent through RPAD to the assessee for hearing on 31.10.2016 and the case was adjourned to 11.01.2017 as the Bench was not functioning. The notice for the next date of hearing i.e. 11.01.2017 was also sent through RPAD but the appellant has not preferred to put in his appearance himself or through his authorized representative nor sent any request for adjournment. So, it is apparent on record that the appellant is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal.

3.

Keeping in view the legal position that mere issuance of notice does not amount to admission of appeal and this issue has been squarely decided by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the present appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the assessee to file an application to recall the order subject to demonstrate that he was prevented by sufficient cause from putting his appearance at the time of hearing. 5. In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted. Order pronounced in open court on this 12th day of January, 2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →