M/s. Bali Farms Private Limited, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2419/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5124 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APARNA KARAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH A , NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI AMIT SHUKLA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 2173, 2174, 2175, 2419 & 2420/DEL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2006 - 07, 2007 - 08, 2008 - 09, 2004 - 05 & 2009 - 10 M/S. BALI FARMS PRIVATE LIMITED, WZ - 13, GALI NO. 18, KRISHNA PARK, TILAK NAGAR, NEW DELHI. PAN AADCB1709R (APPELLANT) VS. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE 21 NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SMT. APARNA KARAN, CIT/DR ORDER PER BENCH : TH ESE FIVE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER S DATED 03.03.2014 AND 28.03.2014 OF LD. CIT(A) - II, NEW DELHI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07, 2007 - 08, 2008 - 09, 2004 - 05 & 2009 - 10 RESPECTIVELY. 2. NONE IS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT DESPITE THE NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS SENT THROUGH REGISTERED POST TO THE APPELLANT AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO. 10 OF FORM NO. 36, FILED BY IT. NO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION IS RECEIVED ON RECORD. IT IS WORTHWHILE TO NOTE THAT AT EARLIER OCCASION ALSO, THESE DATE OF HEARING 14.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17 .08.2017 ITA NOS. 2173 TO 2175 AND 2419 & 2420/DEL./2014 2 APPEALS WERE HEARD AND DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL IN LIMINE VIDE ORDER DATED 03.08.2015, FOR NON - PROSECUTION ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT. THIS EXPARTE ORDER WAS RECALLED ON THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS OF ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 05.12.2016. STILL, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT BEEN DILIGENT TO APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEA RING AND TO PROSECUTE ITS APPEALS. THEREFORE, IT CAN BE SAFELY INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING ITS APPEAL S . IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT WITH US IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE AGAIN IN LIMINE . SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) AND OF M.P. HIGH COURT IN ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP). ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL S DESERVE TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 3. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.08.2017 . SD/ - SD/ - ( AMIT SHUKLA ) (L.P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17.08.2017 *AKS* COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES, NEW DELHI