M/S. TELEVISION EIGHTEEN INDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2013/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 July 2016AY 2002-032 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 serious in pursuing the appeal due to non-appearance. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite proper notice. The assessee also did not request an adjournment.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee on the date of hearing, 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 ‘D’ NEW DELHI

Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH & SHRI L.P. SAHU

Hearing: 18.07.2016Pronounced: 18.07.2016

ORDER

Per L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31.01.2014 passed by learned CIT(A)-XX, New Delhi for assessment year 2002-03.

2.

At the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee despite the notice sent through register post at the address given in column No. 10 of the memorandum of appeal filed by the assessee. No request for adjournment has also come on record. Therefore, it can be safely inferred that the assessee is not serious in pursuing its appeal. In the circumstances, the only alternative left with us is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of Tribunal in CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and of M.P. High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP).

3.

Before parting, we think it appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, then it may, if so advised, pray for a recall of this order and decision on merits.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →