SMT. NEETA AGARWAL,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, MUZAFFARNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2488/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 September 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 inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing her appeal due to non-appearance and non-communication of a new address. Consequently, the appeal was treated as unadmitted and dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was scheduled for hearing, but the notice sent to her registered address was returned with the remark 'After search, not found'. Neither the assessee nor her representative appeared for the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to appear for the hearing and the implications of non-appearance on the appeal's prosecution.

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.

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU

Date of Hearing : 22-09-2016 Date of Order : 22-09-2016

O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal is filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 05.2.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar relevant to assessment year 2006-07.

2.

In this case the Notice was sent to the Assessee for hearing by Regd. AD Post for today i.e. 22.09.2016 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10, but the same was returned back with the remarks that “After search, not found”.

3.

On 22.09.2016, neither the assessee nor her authorised representative attended the hearing and also not filed any application for adjournment and also no fresh address has been given by the Assessee and hence, I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served to serve the notice again and again to the assessee on the same address. In view of above, it is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of her appeal.

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 this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. I would 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 appeal.

5.

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 22-09-2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →