SH. RAJINDRA PAL SINGH,ROORKEE vs. ITO, ROORKEE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2150/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 December 2016AY 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 presumed the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeals due to repeated non-representation. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recall if a reasonable cause for non-representation could be shown.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2006-07 and 2008-09. No one appeared on behalf of the assessee during the hearing, despite proper notice being sent.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee and the consequent dismissal of the 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: ‘SMC-I’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH

Hearing: 09.11.2016Pronounced: 16.12.2016

ORDER The appeals have been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the separate orders dated 05.01.2016 of the CIT(A), Dehradun pertaining to 2006-07 & 2008- 09 AYs on various grounds.

2.

However, at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The appeals were passed over twice. Even in the third round, the position remained the same. Neither the assessee was present nor any adjournment has been placed before the Bench. The record shows that notice for the date of hearing has been sent on 14.10.2016 to the assessee at the address mentioned in column No.10 in the memo of appeal filed which has not been come back unserved. The record further shows that even on an earlier occasion i.e. 22.09.2016 when the appeal came up for hearing vide notice dated 16.08.2016, the assessee remained unrepresented. Accordingly, in these peculiar facts and circumstances in the absence of any request for time till date, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeals filed. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Multi Plan 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.

4.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine. The order is pronounced in the open court on 16th of December, 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →