M/S. HARYANA INDUSTRIES,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1614/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 August 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 issuance of a notice does not amount to admission of an appeal. The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11. Notices were sent for multiple hearings, but the assessee failed to appear or request an adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for hearings despite proper notice.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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 ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI N. K. SAINI & SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI

For Respondent: Shri Amritlal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 22.08.2016Pronounced: 23.08.2016

Date of hearing: 22.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 23.08.2016 ORDER

PER BEENA A. PILLAI, JM:

1.

The assessee has filed the present appeal, against the order dated 23.12.2013 passed by CIT(A)-XXIV, New Delhi for the assessment year 2010-11 on various grounds.

2.

In the present appeal, notice was sent through RPAD to the assessee for hearing on 29.02.2016, which was adjourned to 19.05.2016 on the request of assessee’s counsel. But due to non functioning of the Bench, the hearing was adjourned to 22.08.2018 for which notices were sent to both the parties through RPAD but the assessee has not preferred to put in his appearance himself or through

2 I.T.A.No.1614/Del/2014 his authorized representative nor sent any request for adjournment. So, it is assessee on record that the he is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal.

3.

Keeping in view the legal position that mere issuance of notice does not amount to admission of appeal and this issue has been squarely decided by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the present appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to the assessee to file an application to recall the order subject to demonstrate that he was prevented by sufficient cause from putting his appearance at the time of hearing.

4.

In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted.

5.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd Aug., 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →