M/s. Jay Polychem India Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1338/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0087 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY I BORA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: I-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NOS.-1338 & 1339/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2009-10 & 2010-11) M/S JAY POLYCHEM INDIA LIMITED B-115, GROUND FLOOR, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-1, NEW DELHI. PAN NO. AAACJ0657M (APPELLANT) VS ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, ROOM NO. 332, E-2, ARA CENTRE JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SHRI SANJAY I BORA, CIT DR ORDER PER SH. H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS BOTH DATED 29/01/2016 OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 & 2010-11. 2. IN THESE CASES THE NOTICE WERE SENT TO THE ASSES SEE FOR HEARING I.E. ON 01/04/2019 AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FORM NO. 36 VIDE COLUMN NO. 10. 3. ON 01/04/2019, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ITS AUTH ORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDED THE HEARING AND ALSO NOT FI LED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OR NOR FILED THE FRESH ADDRESS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, HENCE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO SERVE THE NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN ON THE S AME ADDRESS. IN ITA NOS. 1338 & 1339/D/2016 2 VIEW OF ABOVE, IT IS THUS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSE E IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF ITS APPEALS. 4. HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RULES AN D FOLLOWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CLUDING THAT OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. : 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND HONB LE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURTS DECISION IN ESTATE OF LATE TUK OJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UN-A DMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME. WE WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SU BSEQUENTLY, IF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR NON APPEARANCE AN D IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MATTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PU RPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEALS. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 01.04.2019 SD/- SD/- (O.P. KANT) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 01/04/2019 *KAVITA COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI ITA NOS. 1338 & 1339/D/2016 3 DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 01/04/19 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 01/04/19 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 01/04 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 01/04 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED AND UPLOADED 01/04 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 01/04 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.