SARVDAMAN TYAGI,MEERUT vs. CIT, MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3309/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 November 2015AY 2008-092 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's failure to appear and prosecute the appeal indicates a lack of interest. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was scheduled for hearing. However, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared before the tribunal, nor was any adjournment request filed.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

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 “G”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G. D. AGARWAL, HON’BLE & SHRI A. T. VARKEY

O R D E R

PER A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee emanates from the order of Ld. CIT, Meerut, dated 22.03.2013 u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relevant to Assessment Year 2008-09.

2.

Today, i.e. on 05.11.2015 when the case was called on board, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been filed before the Tribunal. It seems that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal; hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be un-admitted and dismissed for non-prosecution. In our above view, we find support from the following decisions:- “ (i). In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have held that “The appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it.” (ii). In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in their order: “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, this court is not bound to answer the reference. (iii). In the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (del). The appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal which was fixed for hearing but on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue / applicant, nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →