M/s Supra Farms & Leasing Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2769/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 276920114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-10-2012
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR B R R KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2769/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 M/S SUPRA FARMS & LEASING LIMITED, 402-403, KUSAL BAZAR, NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI. (PAN NO. AAACS 0430 K) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(4), NEW DELHI. [APPELLANT] [RESPONDEN T] APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 19.0 9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.09.2011 O R D E R PER SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2011 OF CIT(A) XII, NEW DELHI, PERTAINING TO 2004-05 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. VARIOUS GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ITA NO.2769/DEL./2011 A.Y. 2004-05 2 ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. IN THE SECO ND ROUND ALSO NO ONE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN RE CEIVED. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE SAID APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED FOR 01.08.2011 ON A SPECIFIC REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSES SEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN GETTING THE APPEAL PROSECUTED. HON'BLE MADHYA PRAD ESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP) W HILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN D EFAULT 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 SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFER ENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. ITAT, DELHI BENCH D IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD. OBSERVED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 STATE THAT MERE ISSUE OF NOTICE COULD NOT BY ITSELF MEAN THAT THE APPEAL HAD BEEN ADMITTE D. THIS RULE ONLY CLARIFIES THE POSITION. THERE MIGHT BE VARIOUS REASONS WITH T HE APPELLANT TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ONE OF THE REASONS M IGHT 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 . ITA NO.2769/DEL./2011 A.Y. 2004-05 3 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS UN-ADMITTED AND DISMISSED IN LIMINE. WE MAY LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINS THE REAS ONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MATTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR NON-P ROSECUTION. SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) (DIVA SIANGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 19 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 PBN/* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. D.R., ITAT BY ORDER, DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES ITA NO.2769/DEL./2011 A.Y. 2004-05 4