M/s. Endeavour Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1116/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3209 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 02-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DELHI BEFORE SH.G.D.AGRAWAL, HONBLE PRESIDENT AND SH.K.N.CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1116/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 -13) ORDER PER G.D.AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 04.01.2016 IN APPEAL NO.346/2014-15 PASSING BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE AL) [IN SHORT CIT(A)]-3, DELHI FOR THE AY 2012-13, THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS A PPEAL. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRES ENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS MATTER WHEN THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS RETURNED WITH THE ENDORSEMENT OF T HE POSTAL SERVICE THAT THE ADDRESS IS INCOMPLETE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS SENT TO THE ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT FURNISH T HE COMPLETE ADDRESS IN THE APPEAL MEMO, THE NON-SERVICE OF NOTICE IN THIS MATT ER IS SOLELY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN THESE CIRCUMSTAN CES, WE DRAW AN INFERENCE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO INTEREST TO PERSECUTING TH IS APPEAL, AND THE APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. SUPPO RT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF DELHI BENCH OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) ENDEAVOUR INSURANCE BROKING PVT.LTD., C/O-PITAMBER THAKKAR, ADVOCATE, DDA MARKET, KALKAJI, NEW DELHI. PAN-AABCE5722B VS DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. AMIT JAIN, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 14 . 11 .2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14 . 11 .2017 ITA NO. 1116/DEL/2016 2 LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ORDER OF HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 22 3 ITR 480 (M.P). 3. BEFORE PARTING, WE ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO DEEMED FIT TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH OF NOVEMBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (K.N.CHARY) (G.D.AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER PRESIDENT DATE:-14 TH NOVEMBER, 2017 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI