M/S. BHOOMIDHAR BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1082/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 October 2016AY 2005-062 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 that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal due to consistent non-representation. In the absence of representation or a request for adjournment, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. However, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee during the hearing, despite the appeal being passed over twice. Notices sent to the assessee were not returned unserved.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-representation of the assessee before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

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-1’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH

Hearing: 01.09.2016Pronounced: 21.10.2016

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 29.12.2014 of the CIT(A)-2, New Delhi pertaining to 2005-06 AY on various grounds.

2.

However, no one was present on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. The appeal was passed over twice. Even in the third round, the position remained the same as neither the assessee is represented nor there is any adjournment on record. The record shows that the notice has been sent to the assessee on 20.07.2016 at the address indicated in Column No.10, despite this the said notice has not been returned unserved. The record further shows that on earlier occasion i.e 19.07.2016 that the assessee remained unrepresented and the notice sent to the assessee on 07.06.2016 come back unserved with the comment “No such company”. 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. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P).

I.T.A .No.-1082/Del/2015 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 appeal of the assessee is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 21st of October, 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →