New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT

296 ITR 495High Court2008#218 most cited

What is New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT authority for?

The High Court can return a reference unanswered if the assessee fails to appear or provide assistance. This illustrates the broader principle that appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss appeals for non-prosecution when a party does not effectively pursue their case.

351

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT · 296 ITR 495 · dismissal for non-prosecution · assessee non-appearance · failure to assist court · High Court reference unanswered · Section 250(6) · inherent power to dismiss appeal · effective pursuit of appeal

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT

Rayban Organics (P) Ltd., Faridabad vs. JCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution

ITA 2615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Rayban Organics (P) Ltd., Vs. Jcit, C/O- M/S. Chordiya & Company, Range-2, Ghaziabad Cas, 826, Sector-15A, Faridabad Pan :Aaccr8032N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Atiq Ahmed, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 03.07.2018 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal, By The Assessee, Is Directed Against Order Of Cit(A), Muzaffarnagar, Dated 16.02.2015 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2010- 11. 2. In This Case, Notice Was Sent To The Assessee By Rpad On 15.05.2018 At The Address Mentioned In Form No. 36, Fixing The Case For Hearing On 03.07.2018. In Spite Of This, On 03.07.2018 When The Case Was Called Upon, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee, Nor Any Application For Adjournment Has Been Filed. It Is, Thus, Inferred That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Prosecution Of His Appeal. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & Keeping In View The Provisions Of Rule 19(2) Of The Income-Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 As Were Considered In The Case Of Cit Vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 Itd 320)(Del), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution. 4. The Hon'Ble Madhya Pradesh High Court In The Case Of Estate Of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. Cwt (223 Itr 480) Has Held As Under:

…earing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference. " 5. Similarly, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee. 6. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the sam…

Md Synergy India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution

ITA 4878/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Md Synergy India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, 138, Deshbandhu Apartments, Ward-16(1), Room No.312, C.R. Kalkaji, New Delhi Building, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm8918N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2018 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-Iii, New Delhi, Dated 31.03.2010 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. None Put In Appearance On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Hearing Despite Issue Of Notice For Hearing, Through Rpad At The Address Furnished By The Assessee In Column 7 Of The Memo Of Appeal In Form No. 36. The Envelope, Containing The Notice Of Hearing Has Returned Unserved With The Remark “Left”. No Application For Adjournment Of Hearing Has Been Received On Behalf Of The Assessee. It Gives An Impression That Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Appeal. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & Keeping In View The Provisions Of Rule 19(2) Of The Income-Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 As Were Considered In The Case Of Cit Vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 Itd 320)(Del), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution. 4. The Hon'Ble Madhya Pradesh High Court In The Case Of Estate Of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. Cwt (223 Itr 480) Has Held As Under:

…earing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference. " 5. Similarly, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee. 6. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the sam…

Swiber Offshore Marine Pte Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution

ITA 1519/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Swiber Offshore Marine Pte. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C/O- Srbc & Associates Llp, 14Th International Taxation, Circle -2, Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Dehradun Bapat Marg, Dadar (W), Mumbai Pan :Aajcs6025K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2018 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-Ii, New Delhi, Dated 10.12.2014, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. On The Last Date Of Hearing, I.E., 24.05.2018, When The Case Was Called Upon, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & The Case Was Adjourned To 21.06.2018 With The Direction To Issue Fresh Notice, Which Has Not Returned Unserved. Today, I.E., 21.06.2018, Again None Turned Up On Behalf Of The Assessee & Even No Application For Adjournment Of Hearing Has Been Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee. It Gives An Impression That Assessee Is Not Interested In Pursuing Its Appeal. 3. Considering The Facts Of The Case & Keeping In View The Provisions Of Rule 19(2) Of The Income-Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 As Were Considered In The Case Of Cit Vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 Itd 320)(Del), The Assessee’S Appeal Is Liable To Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution. 4. The Hon'Ble Madhya Pradesh High Court In The Case Of Estate Of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. Cwt (223 Itr 480) Has Held As Under:

…earing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference. " 5. Similarly, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee. 6. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the sam…