M/s. DCM Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3042/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1738 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARWINDER KAUR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH.INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO. - 3042 /DEL/201 3 (ASSESSMENT YEAR - 200 6 - 07 ) DCM FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., D - 7/3, MEZZANINE FLOOR, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE - II, NEW DELHI - 110020. PAN - AAACD0106F (APPELLANT) VS ITO, CO.WARD - 10(2), NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SMT. PARWINDER KAUR, SR. DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2013 OF CIT(A) - V, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 200 6 - 07 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING , NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL ACCORDINGLY WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. DESPITE THIS FACT, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. EVEN IN THE THIRD ROUND, NO ONE WAS PRESENT. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE APPEAL WHICH WAS FILED ON 15.05.2013 CAME UP FOR HEARING FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 13.11.2013 ON WHICH DATE IT WAS ADJOURNED ON ASSESSEE S REQUEST. SIMILARLY ON 19.11.2014 & 24.03.2015 WHEN THE APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING, IT WAS ADJOURNED ON ASSESSEE S R EQUEST. DESPITE THIS FACT THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. A PERUSAL OF THE ADJOURNMENT PETITION MOVED ON 24.03.2015 SHOWS THAT THE PRESENT DATE OF HEARING WAS NOTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY IN THE ABSENCE OF REPEATED NON - REPRESENTATIO N OR PETITION SEEKING TIME, IT CAN BE PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS DATE OF HEARING 02 .0 7 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12 .0 8 .2015 I.T.A .NO. - 3042 / DEL/201 3 PAGE 2 OF 2 NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEAL. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REAS ONABLE CAUSE FOR NON - REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING THEN IT MAY IF SO ADVISED PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND DECISIONS ON MERITS. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD. (SUPRA), WE HOLD THE APPEAL T O BE UNADMITTED WITH THE LIBERTY TO ASSESSEE TO MOVE APPROPRIATE APPLICATION AND CORRECT THE DEFECT WHATSOEVER IN THE MEMO ABOUT ITS ADDRESS TO ENSURE A PROPER HEARING OF THE APPEAL. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 2 T H OF AUGUST , 2015. S D / - S D / - (INTURI RAMA RAO) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 2 /08 /2015 * AMIT KUMAR * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI