SUKUMAR RAJAGOPALAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 719/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 October 2016AY 2007-082 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 lack of representation and uncured defects. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed without addressing the merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08. The assessee's counsel was out of station, and defects pointed out by the registry remained uncured.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to appear and cure defects, leading to the 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-1’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT DIVA SINGH

Hearing: 06.09.2016Pronounced: 21.10.2016

Date of Hearing 06.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement 21.10.2016 ORDER Both these appeals have been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 26.11.2015 of the CIT(A)-15, Delhi pertaining to 2006-07 & 2007-08 AYs on various grounds.

2.

An adjournment petition was moved by the assessee stating that the counsel is out of station. It is further seen that the defect pointed out by the Registry on 17.03.2016 till date has not been cured. The appeal was passed over twice. Even in the third round, no one was present to address why the defect pointed out by the Registry on 17.03.2016 till date has not been cured. 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 appeals. Thus, in the absence of any effective representation, the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeals 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).

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 and undertaking that the defect shall be cured would then 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.

I.T.A .No.-718 & 719/Del/2016

4.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 21st of October, 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →