Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-II’ NEW DELHI
Before: SMT DIVA SINGH
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 29.02.2016 of CIT(A), Ghaziabad pertaining to 2008–09 assessment year on various grounds.
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. The record shows that the notice for the specific date of hearing has been issued on 06.10.2016 at the address given in Form No.36, Column No.-10 which has not come back unserved. The record further shows that on the earlier date of hearing i.e. 27.09.2016 in response to notice issued 29.08.2016, the assessee remained unrepresented. It is further seen that no Power of Attorney has been executed by the assessee in favour of any one.
Accordingly, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal. Accordingly in the absence of any representation or petition seeking time, the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee 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).
I.T.A .No.-2666/Del/2016 Poineer Contractors & Engineers P.Ltd. vs ITO
Page 2 of 2 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.