M/S. MKG INSURANCE BROKERS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Date of Hearing 29.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement 19.10.2016 ORDER The present appeal came up for hearing as a result of order dated 29.07.2016 in M.A.No.358/Del/2015 wherein the Co-ordinate Bench recalled the ex-parte order dated 20.12.2013 holding that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance of the assessee on 16.12.2013 when the appeal was fixed for hearing. As a result of the said order, the appeal was fixed for hearing on 27.07.2016 on which date inadvertently it could not be fixed by the Registry which listed the same for hearing on 29.08.2016. However, on the date of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. It is seen that the present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 19.11.2012 of the CIT(A), New Delhi pertaining to 2003-04. As observed the record shows that the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the Co- ordinate Bench by an order dated 20.12.2013 confirming the addition of Rs.1,29,380/- made by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) holding as under:- 2.5. “On perusal of the material on record, I observe that the assessee has not placed any material to establish the creditworthiness of the loan creditors nor there is any evidence to establish the genuineness of the transaction particularly when the amount was taken in cash. The assessee could at least file the bank statements of the loan creditors but the same is not on record, nor it was filed before the authorities below. Considering the facts of the case and the reasoning as stated by learned CIT(A), I do not find any reason to interfere with the order fo the learned CIT(A. Hence, I uphold the order fo learned CIT(A by rejecting the ground of appeal taken by the assessee.”

I.T.A .No.-1076/Del/2013 2. Aggrieved by this, the assessee filed an M.A. petition before the ITAT pleading that the Counsel could not present on account of heavy traffic jam and pray for a recall of this order. The said prayer was allowed by the Co-ordinate Bench. Despite this fact, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal as otherwise there is nothing on record to show that the assessee is interested in addressing the delay. Accordingly in the absence of any representation or petition seeking time, the only alternative left is to dismiss 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).