CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL (TITAWI),MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. CIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6434/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 February 20162 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 held that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal due to consistent non-representation. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT challenging an order of the CIT. Despite multiple notices and opportunities, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee for the hearing. The Tribunal noted the repeated non-appearance and the lack of any petition for adjournment.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee due to repeated absence from hearings.

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: ‘D’ NEW DELHI

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

For Respondent: Ms. Sulekhha Verma, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 28.01.2016Pronounced: 08.02.2016

Date of Hearing 28.01.2016 Date of Pronouncement 08.02.2016 ORDER

PER DIVA SINGH, JM

1.

The present appeal was filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 14.03.2013 of CIT, Muzaffarnagar on the various grounds.

2.

However, at the time of hearing no one was present on behalf of the assessee and the appeal was passed over twice. Despite this even in the third round, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The record shows that on the earlier occasions when the appeal came up for hearing i.e. 8th June, 2015 and 3rd November, 2015 it was adjourned on account of the fact that despite notice no one was present. It is further seen from the record that for the present date of hearing notice has been issued to the assessee on 10.12.2015 at the address given in column no. 10 in the memo of appeal filed. In the circumstances it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal. 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).

.T.A .No. 6434/Del/2013 Cane Development Council (Titawi) 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; and the assessee is in a position to address the delay then the assessee if so advised would be at liberty to pray for a recall of this order and decision on merit. 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 08 of February, 2016.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →