SH. SUDESH DALAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4446/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 June 2016AY 2008-092 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, in the absence of any representation from the assessee and no request for adjournment, presumed the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT, but did not appear for the hearing despite the appeal being passed over twice. Notices were sent to the assessee's registered address and were not returned as unserved.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed in limine due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of representation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 282

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: SMT DIVA SINGH

Hearing: 22.06.2016Pronounced: 27.06.2016

Date of Hearing 22.06.2016 Date of Pronouncement 27.06.2016 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 21.05.2014 of CIT(A)-XI, New Delhi pertaining to 2008-09 assessment year.

2.

However, no one was present on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing, the appeal was passed over twice. Even in the third round also, the position remained the same. The record shows that the notice had been sent by the Registry on 19.05.2016 at the address mentioned in Column No.10. Since it has not come back unserved, the service of notice is deemed sufficient on the assessee relying on Order V Rule 9 of the CPC read with section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the afore-mentioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss

I.T.A .No.-4524 to 4528/Del/2014 the appeal 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, it would 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.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 27th of June, 2016.

More judgments on Section 282

All 613 judgments and leading authorities on Section 282 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →