Spectranet Ltd, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1091/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1332 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-10-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 20-10-2009
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 24-03-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K CHAND

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JM AND SHRI R.C.SHARMA, A M ITA NO.1091/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 M/S SPECTRANET LIMITED, 42, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, NEW DELHI 110 020. PAN NO.AAFCS9347G. VS. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-9(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N.K.CHAND, SR.DR. ORDER PER R.C.SHARMA, AM : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE O RDER OF CIT(A) DATED 16.12.2008. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, NOBODY HAS PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION REQUESTING FOR ADJ OURNMENT OR OTHERWISE HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE AS SESSEE WELL IN ADVANCE AND HAS NOT RETURNED UNSERVED FROM THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES A ND IS DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN SERVED. ON THE PREVIOUS OCCASION ALSO WHEN THE APP EAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING I.E. ON 1.6.2009, NOBODY HAD PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED. THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT HE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS NARRATED ABOVE AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT.LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND M .P.HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), THIS APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED ITA-1091/D/2009 2 AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. T HE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THE TRIBUNAL EXPLAINING THE R EASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE AND FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 20 TH OCTOBER, 2009. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 20.10.2009. VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT DEPUTY REGISTRAR