Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’: NEW DELHI
Before: SH. H.S. SIDHU & SH. O.P. KANT
PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), dated 05.07.2013 for assessment year 2009-10. 2. Earlier on 15.07.2015, on the request of learned Departmental Representative, the case was adjourned to 16.09.2015, which was informed to both the parties. On 16.09.2015, the case was fixed for 19.11.2015 due to non- function of Bench. Thereafter, on 19.11.2015, the case was adjourned to 22.02.2016 and again to 23.05.2016 on the request of assessee’s counsel. On 23.05.2016, when the case was called upon, neither any one appeared, nor any application for adjournment has been received on behalf of the assessee. It gives an impression that assessee is not interested in pursuing its appeal.
Considering the facts of the case and keeping in view the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as were 2 AY: 2009-10 considered in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 ITD 320)(Del), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.
The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under: "if the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails 'to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference. "
Similarly, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New
Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same.
Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the above appeal for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, then he would be at liberty to pray for a recall of this order by moving an appropriate application.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. The decision is pronounced in the open court on 27th May, 2016. (H.S. SIDHU) (O.P. KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 27th May, 2016. RK/-