VIRENDRA MOHAN UNIYAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1634/DEL/2012Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 February 2016AY 2001-022 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 inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Following established rules and precedents, the appeal was treated as unadmitted and dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2001-02. Despite a notice being sent for the hearing, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. No adjournment application was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee for the hearing, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without adjudication on merits.

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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI O.P. KANT

Hearing: 16.02.2016

Date of Hearing: 16.02.2016 Date of Order : 16.02.2016 ORDER

PER H.S. SIDHU : JM

1.

This appeal is filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 18.1.2012 of the Ld. CIT(A)-II, Dehradun relevant to assessment year 2001-02.

2.

In this case the Notice was sent to the Assessee for hearing by Regd. AD Post for today i.e. 16.02.2016 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10. 3. On 16.02.2016, neither the assessee nor his authorised representative attended the hearing and also not filed any application for adjournment 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), we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. We may 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.

6.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16.02.2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →