SH. AKASH BHASIN,DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4005/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 October 2016AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that neither the assessee nor their representative appeared for the hearing and no adjournment was sought. Inferring the assessee's lack of interest, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2011-12. The notice for the hearing was sent to the assessee's registered address but was returned unserved.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee and their representative for the hearing, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

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

For Respondent: Smt. F.R. Meena, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing : 19-10-2016 Date of Order : 19-10-2016

O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal is filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 7.4.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A)-14, New Delhi relevant to assessment year 2011-12.

2.

In this case the Notice was sent to the Assessee for hearing by Regd. AD Post for today i.e. 19.10.2016 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10, but the same was returned back unserved.

3.

On 19.10.2016, neither the assessee nor his authorised representative attended the hearing and also not filed any application for adjournment and also no fresh address has been given by the Assessee, 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 his 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 19-10-2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →