Devinder Pal Singh Kohli, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1665/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2815 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCHES: B NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. APPEAL NOS. 1665 & 1666/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 & 2009-10 SHRI DEVINDER PAL SINGH KOHLI, ASSTT. COMMISSIONER C/O. SHRI RAKESH CHADHA, C. A.; VS. OF INCOME TAX, E95/2, NARAINA VIHAR, CIRCLE : 11, N E W D E L H I 110 028. NEW DELHI. PAN : APRPK 9704 M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : N O N E; DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, SR. D. R. DATE OF HEARING : 02.05.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.06.2017 O R D E R . PER I. C. SUDHIR, J. M. : BOTH THE ABOVE APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE. THESE WERE TIME BARRED AND APPLICATIONS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ALONG WITH AFFIDAVITS WERE FILED. THESE APPEALS WERE FIRST LISTED FOR HEARING ON 05.04.2016 ON WHICH DATE THE SAME WERE ADJOURNED TO 26.07.2016 DUE TO NON-FUNCTIONING OF THE BENCH. ON 26.07.2016, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND BOTH THE APPEALS WERE ADJOURNED TO 2 07.11.2016 WITH A DIRECTION TO THE REGISTRY THAT ISSUE NOTICE BY RPAD. ON 07.11.2016 BOTH THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED TO 06.02.2017. ON 07.11.2016 AND 06.02.2017 AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION, BOTH THE APPEALS WERE ADJOURNED TO 02.05.2017 AND THE NOTICE FIXING THE DATE WAS ISSUED BY SPEED POST. 2. NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 02.05.2017 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY POST ON 28.03.2017 AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FORM NO. 36 VIDE COLUMN NO. 10 WHICH HAS BEEN RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITY WITH THE REMARK REFUSED. IT IS, THUS, INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF HIS APPEALS, THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO SEND THE NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN ON THE SAME ADDRESS. THESE APPEALS ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED IN DEFAULT, FOR NON-PROSECUTION. 3. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 21 ST JUNE, 2017 . SD/- SD/- ( L. P. SAHU ) ( I. C. SUDHIR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : THE 21 ST JUNE, 2017 . *MEHTA* 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. APPELLANT; 2. RESPONDENT; 3. CIT; 4. CIT (APPEALS); 5. DR, ITAT, ND. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE DRAFT DICTATED ON 21.06.2017 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 21.06.2017 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 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. 4