ANAND PRAKASH BANSAL vs. ITO, WARD-2(1),

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4024/DEL/2005Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 March 2016AY 1986-19872 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 observed that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal due to repeated non-appearance. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 1986-87. The appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but the assessee or their representative failed to appear on each occasion. No request for adjournment or explanation for absence was provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's persistent non-representation and lack of seriousness in pursuing the matter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(2)

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: ‘C’ NEW DELHI

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

Hearing: 15.02.2016Pronounced: 03.03.2016

Date of Hearing 15.02.2016 Date of Pronouncement 03.03.2016 ORDER

PER DIVA SINGH, JM

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 04.08.2000 of CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar pertaining to 1986-87 assessment year.

2.

However, at the time of hearing no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The record shows that the present appeal came up for hearing pursuant to the order u/s 254(2) dated 28.10.2015 in MA No.289/Del/2012 wherein the Registry was directed to fix the appeal for hearing on 13.11.2015. On the said date, the record shows that the Bench was not functional. Accordingly, notice for the date of hearing was issued to the assessee on 28.12.2015 at the address given by the assessee in column No.10. It is seen that despite this fact, no one was present and no amendment in column No.10 in the memo of appeal filed has been carried out by the assessee. Even till the date of passing of this order, no request on behalf of the assessee has been placed on record. In the afore-mentioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in the absence of any representation or petition seeking time, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal.

I.T.A .No.-4024/Del/2005 Accordingly 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).

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 03rd of March, 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →