M/s Cimmco Birla Ltd., Noida V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1629/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 162920114 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 25-02-2011
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH B DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI R. P. TOLANI, JM AND SHRI K. D. RA NJAN, AM I. T. APPEAL NO. 1629 (DEL) OF 2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1999-2000. M/S. CIMMCO BIRLA LTD., ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, A 35, SECTOR : 2, VS. C I R C L E : 3 (1), N O I D A 201 301 [U. P.] N E W D E L H I. P A N / G I R NO. AAA CC 0907 H. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : N O N E; DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI ROHIT GARG, SR. D. R.; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 19 99-2000 ARISES OUT OF ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS)-VI, NEW DELHI. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIRST FIXED FOR HEARING ON 10/06 /2010 AND THIS DATE WAS NOTED AT THE TIME OF FILING OF THE APPEAL ON 12 TH APRIL, 2010. ON 10 TH AUGUST, 2011 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 28/07/2010 AND 24/09/2010 SIMULTANEOUSLY AT THE REQ UEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE. ON 24/09/2010 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION. THE CASE WAS AGAIN FIXED ON 7/12/2010, BUT THE CASE WAS AGAIN ADJOURNED TO 25/0 2/2011 AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. ON 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2010 THE CASE WAS AGAIN ADJOURNED TO 21/0 4/2011, AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION. THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 25 TH AUGUST, 2011. ON 25/08/2011, AT THE TIME OF HEARI NG, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR, NOBODY APPEARED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR WAS ANY APPLICATION 2 I. T. APPEAL NO. 1629 (DEL) OF 2010 FOR ADJOURNMENT RECEIVED. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSES SEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN GETTING THE APPEAL PROSECUTED. HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN T HE CASE OF TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: IF THE PARTY AT WHOSE INSTANCE, THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOK S O AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. ITAT DELHI BENCH D IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD. OBSERVED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 STATE THAT MERE ISSUE OF NOTI CE COULD NOT BY ITSELF MEAN THAT THE APPEAL HAD BEEN ADMITTED. THIS RULE ONLY CLARIFIES THE POSITIO N. THERE MIGHT BE VARIOUS REASONS WITH THE APPELLANT TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT ALSO BE A DESIRE OR ABSENCE OF NEED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL OR LIABILIT Y TO ASSIST THE TRIBUNAL IN A PROPER MANNER OR TO TAKE BENEFIT OF VAGARIES OF LAW. 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS UN-ADMITTED AND DISMISSED IN LIMINE. WE MAY LIKE T O CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MATTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APP EAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 25 TH AUGUST, 2011. SD/- S D/- [ R. P. TOLANI ] [ K. D. RANJAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 25 TH AUGUST, 2011. *MEHTA * COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : - 1. APPELLANT. 3 I. T. APPEAL NO. 1629 (DEL) OF 2010 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT, 4. CIT (APPEALS), 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT. 4 I. T. APPEAL NO. 1629 (DEL) OF 2010