Ramesh Sharma, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2911/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 291120114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 14-10-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEVI SHARAN SINGH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2911/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 RAMESH SHARMA, VS. ACIT, 212, PRAKASH DEEP. CIRCLE 47(1), 7, TOLSTOY MARG, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. AASPS8687H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. DEVI SHARAN SINGH, SR. D R ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 28.02.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 . 2. THE ASSESSEES APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 1 4.010.2014 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ON THE AD DRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM NO. 36 COLUMN NO. 10, IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME THE ASSESSEE NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARE D NOR FILED AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. 3. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES W E ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO ISSUE NOTICE A GAIN AND AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAME ADDRESS. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MATTER IN DISPUTE AND THE PRESENT APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS UN-ADMITTED IN LIMINE. THER EFORE, WE DISMISS THE SAME FOR NON-PROSECUTION, FINDING SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: ITA NOS. 2911/D/2013 RAMESH SHARMA 2 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT T HE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATI ON IN THEIR ORDER: 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 BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEAR ING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPE LLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. TH ERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVEN UE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE RE VENUE AS UN- ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF TH E APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14/10/2014 SD/- SD/- (J.S. REDDY) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 14/10/2014 *KAVITA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ITA NOS. 2911/D/2013 RAMESH SHARMA 3 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR