BLUE ENGINEERING PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE-I, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4282/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 October 2023AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)2 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 noted that the assessee did not rectify the defects in the appeal and did not appear for any of the hearings. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as defective.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT for AY 2013-14, but it had defects. The registry issued a defect notice, which the assessee failed to rectify despite multiple hearing opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be admitted and heard when the assessee fails to rectify defects and remain absent despite several opportunities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Hearing: 30/10/2023Pronounced: 31/10/2023

O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: The appeal in 1. of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Faridabad [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] in Appeal No. 10532/2016-17 dated 27.02.2019 against the order of assessment passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 29.09.2016 by the Assessing Officer, DCIT, Circle-I, Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

At the outset, we find the appeal was filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2. 2013-14 before us on 10.05.2019 with certain defects. The registry had issued the defect notice to the assessee on 10.05.2019 itself. The said defect is not yet rectified by the assessee by filing the requisite documents that were called for in the defect notice. This appeal has been listed for hearing on 18.11.2020, 19.11.2020, 27.11.2020, 23.5.2022, 30.8.2022, 8.12.2022, 6.3.2023, 16.5.2023, 3.8.2023 and on 30.10.2023 i.e. today. Notice of hearing was duly issued to the assessee at the registered address mentioned in Form 36 but on Page | 1 none of these occasions, there was any representation from the side of the assessee nor any adjournment request has been filed. Since sufficient opportunities were given to the assessee and the assessee had not even taken the minimum effort of even rectifying the defects, we do not deem it fit to wait for the presence of assessee. Since the defects are not removed by the assessee, the appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2013-14 is hereby dismissed as defective.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as defective.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →