Mrs. Nidhi Verma, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 274/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 27420114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 10-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DANKANUNJNA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.274 /DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 MRS. NIDHI VERMA, VS. ITO, WARD 22(1), 232, KAILASH HILLS, NEW DELHI EAST OF KAILASH, NEW DELHI-110 065 GIR / PAN:AAEPV7268F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P DANKANUNJNA SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 10.03.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.03.2015 ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. CIT(A) XII, NEW DELHI DATED 31.10.2011. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 20.03.2012, WHICH WAS ADJOURNED TO 30.07.2012 ON WRITTEN REQUEST OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND THEREAFTER, BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION ON TWO OCCASIONS BUT AGAIN ON 17.07.2013, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 4.12.2013 ON WRITTEN REQUEST OF AS SESSEES COUNSEL AND AGAIN AFTER NON FUNCTIONING OF BENCH, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 13.10.2014 ON WHICH DATE ALSO NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF AS SESSEE. FINALLY THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 10.03.2015 AND NOTI CE WAS SENT THROUGH RPAD WELL IN ADVANCE. ON 10.03.2015 ALSO, NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF ITA NO.274/DEL/2012 2 ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN R ECEIVED. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, IT IS IMPLIED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTER ESTED IN PROSECUTION OF ITS APPEAL AND THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS UNADMITTED AS MERE ISSUE OF NOTICE DOES NOT MEAN THAT APPEAL IS ADMITT ED. WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: 3. THE ITAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA ) PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) HAD OCCASION TO CONSIDER THE ASPECT OF A DMISSIBILITY OF APPEAL FOR HEARING BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: '4. A JUDICIAL BODY HAS CERTAIN INHERENT POWERS. DE CISIONS ARE TAKEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROPER AND EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF THE APPEALS IN PRESENT CLIMATE OF MOUNTING ARREARS PARTLY DUE TO APPEALS BEING FILED WITHOUT PROPER APPLICATION O F MIND TO FACTS AND LAW AND ALSO AT TIMES FOR ALTOGETHER EXTR ANEOUS CONSIDERATIONS. THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS THE TRIBUNAL TREATED THE APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. THE PROV ISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES SUPPORT SUC H ACTION BY STATING THAT MERE ISSUE OF NOTICE COULD NOT BY ITSE LF MEAN THAT APPEAL HAD BEEN ADMITTED. THIS RULE ONLY CLARIFIED THE POSITION. THERE IS JUSTIFICATION FOR RULE 19(2). WHEN THE APP EAL IS PRESENTED THE SAME IS ACCEPTED. THEREAFTER THE CONC ERNED CLERK IN REGISTRY VERIFIES WHETHER ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS ARE RECEIVED OR NOT AND IF NOT A MEMO IS ISSUED CALLING FOR THE PAPERS WHICH ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO BE ATTACHED TO AP PEAL MEMO. BUT AT NO STAGE USUALLY THE SCRUTINY IS MADE ON POI NTS WHETHER THE APPEAL MEMO AND CONTENTS REALLY CONFORM TO VARI OUS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES OR IS IT A LEGALLY VALID A PPEAL UNDER SECTION 253 OF THE ACT. THOSE POINTS IF ARISING CAN BE CONSIDERED ONLY AT A TIME OF HEARING. AND THAT IS W HY THE RULE PRESCRIBES THAT MERE ISSUE OF NOTICE DOES NOT MEAN APPEAL IS ADMITTED. THIS ACCORDING TO US, IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF RULE 19(2). ITA NO.274/DEL/2012 3 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS UNADMITTED AND THEREFORE, IS DISMISSED. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IS A T LIBERTY TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER PROVIDED SHE CA N DEMONSTRATE THAT IT WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 5. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. 6. ORDER AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ORALLY ON THE DATE OF HEARING IS PRONOUNCED IN WRITING ON 11 TH MARCH, 2015. SD./- SD./- (H. S. SIDHU ) (T.S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 11 TH MARCH, 2015 SP COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)-, NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DEL HI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER (ITAT, NEW DELHI). S.NO. DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 10/3 SR. PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 11,11/3 SR. PS/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER AM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS 11/3 SR. PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 11/3 SR. PS/PS 7 FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK 11/3 SR. PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO HEAD CLERK 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO A.R. 10 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER