SH. MOHIT JAIN,MEERUT vs. ACIT, MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4371/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 January 2017AY 2004-052 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 inferred that the assessee was not serious about pursuing the appeals due to their non-appearance. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed without a decision on the merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were listed for hearing on a date fixed at their counsel's request. However, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared for the hearing, and no adjournment request was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to appear for the hearing, leading to the dismissal of their appeals in limine.

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 ‘E’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI I.C. SUDHIR & SHRI L.P. SAHU

Hearing: 08.12.2016Pronounced: 10.01.2017

Per L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member: These appeals by the assessee are directed against the orders dated 28.03.2014 passed by learned CIT(A)-Meerut for assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06.

2.

At the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee despite the date of hearing in these appeals was fixed on the written request of the assessee’s counsel and its information was given in the open court. No request for adjournment has also come on record. Therefore, it can be safely inferred that the assessee is not serious in pursuing its appeals. In the circumstances, the only alternative left with us is to dismiss the appeals of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of Tribunal in CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and of M.P. High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP).

3.

Before parting, we think it appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, then it may, if so advised, pray for recall of this order and decision on merits.

4.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 10.01.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →