M/S NU LOOK FINANCE & LEASING LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3360/DEL/2011Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 December 2015AY 1999-20003 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 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee due to non-prosecution. The assessee was given the liberty to file an application for recalling the order if they could provide satisfactory reasons for non-compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The case was listed for multiple hearings, but the assessee or their representative did not attend any of the hearings. No adjournment was sought by the assessee.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal due to the assessee's failure to appear and prosecute the case before the Tribunal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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 BENCHES: “E” New Delhi

Before: SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Respondent: Shri P. Dam Kanunjna
Hearing: 21.12.2015Pronounced: 31.12.2015

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.3.2011 of CIT(A)-XVI, New Delhi.

1.

2. The case was earlier fixed for hearing on 17.11.2014, 6.4.2015, 22.5.2015, 31.8.2015. None attended on behalf of the assessee before us. No application was moved seeking adjournment of the case.

3. In the peculiar facts and circumstances and keeping in view the provisions of Order V Rule 19A of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, as were considered in the cases of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del); and Late Tukoji Nu Look Finance & Leasing Ltd. vs. ITO Rao Holkar, 223 ITR 480 (MP), CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478], Late Mrs. Banu E Cowasji Vs. CIT 276 ITR 594 (MP) we dismiss this appeal filed by the assessee. The assessee, if so advised, shall be free to move this Tribunal praying for recalling of this order and explaining the reasons for non-compliance etc. and if the Bench is so satisfied about the reasons etc., then this order shall be recalled.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31.12.2015. sd/- sd/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: the 31.12.2015 ‘veena’ Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. Guard File By order Dy. Registrar Nu Look Finance & Leasing Ltd. vs. ITO

Sl. Description Date No.

1.

Date of dictation by the Author 29.12.2015

2.

Draft placed before the Dictating Member 29.12.2015

3.

Draft placed before the Second Member

4. Draft approved by the Second Member

5.

Date of approved order comes to the Sr. PS

6.

Date of pronouncement of order

7.

Date of file sent to the Bench Clerk

8.

Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk

9.

Date of dispatch of order

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →