M/s. Aditya Landcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

CO 161/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2999 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER C.O. NOS. 161 & 162/DEL OF 2016 (IN ITA NOS.782 & 783/DEL/2016) ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10 & 2012-13 ADITYA LANDCONPVT. LTD., E-9, PANCHSHEEL PARK, NEW DELHI. PAN: AAHCA0191N VS ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI S.S. RANA, CIT DR ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM THESE TWO CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 27.11.2015PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-29, NEW DELHI {CIT(A)} IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 AND 2012-13. DATE OF HEARING: 27.02.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27.02.2019 2 2. WHEN THE MATTER IS CALLED TODAY FOR HEARING, THERE IS NO REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS SEEN FROM THE RECORD THAT NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN FORM NO.36A. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT VIDE ORDER DATED 2.8.2018, A COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL CONSISTING ONE OF US ALSO, IN ITA NOS. 782 & 783/DEL/2016 FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DISMISSED THE DEPARTMENT APPEALS, TAX EFFECT BEING LESS THAN RS.20 LACS. IT SEEMSTHAT AS THE DEPARTMENTS APPEALS AGAINST THE SAME IMPUGNED ORDER STAND DISMISSED, THE ASSESSEE HAD NO INTEREST TO PROSECUTE THE CROSS OBJECTIONS.SINCE THERE HAS BEEN NO REPRESENTATION FOR THE ASSESSEE EITHER IN PERSON OR THROUGH HIS AR, IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WE ARE LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO HOLD THAT BOTH THESECROSS OBJECTIONS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. 3. WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL) WHEREIN THERE WAS NO REPRESENTATION FOR THE APPELLANT IN THE APPEAL FILED BY HIM BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED AS TO WHY THE APPELLANT HAD CHOSEN TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS TREATS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISION, BOTH THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THEY ARE, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 3 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ARE DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (K.NARASIMHA CHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2019. VJ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DRAFT DICTATED ON 27.02.2019 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 27.02.2019 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER ON THE WEBSITE FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.