SHRI ARVIND KUMAR NANDAL,ROHTAK vs. ITO, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3797/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 October 2016AY 2011-123 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, noting the assessee's non-appearance, the returned notices, and the time-barred nature of the appeals, decided to dismiss the appeals without delving into the merits. The Tribunal clarified that the appeals could be recalled if the assessee provides satisfactory reasons for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. Notices sent to the assessee were returned undelivered, and no fresh address was provided. The appeals were also found to be time-barred.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be dismissed in limine due to the assessee's non-appearance and the appeals being time-barred.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules

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-3”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU

Hearing: 13.10.2016

Date of Hearing: 13.10.2016 Date of Order : 13-10-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM These appeals are filed by the Assessee are directed against the separate Orders both dated 18.2.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad relevant to assessment year 2011-12. Since these appeals were pertain to same assessee and therefore, heard together. Hence, these appeals are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

2.

In these cases the Notices were sent to the Assessee for hearing by Regd. AD Post for 13.10.2016 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No.

10.

However, the same has been returned back with the postal remarks “Receiver Not Found”. Assessee also has not furnished any fresh address before the Tribunal.

3.

Therefore, on 13.10.2016, neither the assessee nor his Authorised Representative/Counsel attended the hearing and also not filed any application for adjournment. It is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of his Appeals. Even otherwise, the present Appeals are time barred by 47 days which has not been condoned by the Bench till date.

4.

Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd. : 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), I treat these appeals as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I may like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpose of adjudication of the Appeals.

5.

In the result, both the Appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine.

6.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13-10-2016.

[H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER “SRBHATNAGAR”

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →