MEGATECH MEDIA LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 16(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4784/DEL/2018Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 November 2023AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI KUL BHARAT (Judicial Member)3 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 appeal could not be proceeded with due to defects and the assessee's non-appearance. The grounds of appeal also appeared to relate to quantum proceedings, not penalty proceedings as suggested by the order under challenge.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The assessee failed to appear for hearings and did not rectify defects in the appeal filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable due to defects in filing and non-appearance of the assessee. Whether the grounds of appeal align with the order being challenged.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI KUL BHARAT

For Appellant: Ms. Raja Rajeshwari R, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Ms. Raja Rajeshwari R, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.11.2023Pronounced: 16.11.2023

O R D E R

PER KUL BHARAT, JM:

1.

This appeal, preferred by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-15, New Delhi, dated 27.03.2018, pertaining to the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. That the impugned order is arbitrary, bad in law and against well settled principles of law on the issues in controversy. 2. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, New Delhi, has erred in law as well as on facts and in circumstances of the case in confirming the addition made by the AO under section 68 without appreciating the material available on record and various pronouncements and relevant judgements.

3. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal

at the time of hearing.”

2. No one attended the proceedings. It is seen from the record that no one has been attending the proceedings since the institution of the present appeal. The notices sent by the Registry have been returned with the postal remark “left”. No change in address, if any, has been furnished by the assessee. Therefore, the appeal is taken up for hearing ex parte to the assessee.

3.

We have heard the learned DR and perused the material available on record. It is seen from the records that the defects pointed out by the Registry in filing the present appeal, have not been removed on behalf of the assessee. Furthermore, it is seen that the order in challenge before us is in respect of penalty proceedings, however, the grounds of appeal relate to the quantum proceedings. In view of above, the present appeal preferred by the assessee cannot be proceeded with and is liable to be dismissed as defective. We order accordingly.

4.

Appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. pronounced in open court on 16th November, 2023.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →