GOPI CHAND SHARMA,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 534/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 October 2016AY 2010-113 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's failure to appear and prosecute the appeal indicates a lack of interest. The appeal was also found to be defective due to the absence of a power of attorney.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT for AY 2010-11. On the date of hearing, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was any adjournment application filed. The notice of hearing was duly served.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for hearing. Whether a defective appeal, lacking a power of attorney, is liable for dismissal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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-II : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Respondent: Shri F.R. Meena, Sr.DR
Hearing: 25.10.2016Pronounced: 25.10.2016

(Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by: Shri F.R. Meena, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 25.10.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 25.10.2016 ORDER

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 18.11.2014 in relation to Assessment Year 2010-11.

2.

When the matter was called up for hearing today, no one has appeared on behalf of the assessee. The assessee has not filed any adjournment application also. The notice of hearing sent to the assessee to the address given in Column No.10 of Form No.36 has not been returned unserved. In these circumstances, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting his appeal. The appeal filed by the assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. Our above view finds support from the following decisions:-

1. 1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & anr., 118 ITR 461, wherein their Lordships have held: “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.”

2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), wherein, while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default, their Lordships made the following observation:- “If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference.”

3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Del.),wherein the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as unadmitted in view of the provision of Rule 19 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

4.

Moreover, it is found that the appeal is defective inasmuch as the power of attorney is not filed by the assessee. On this count also the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →