Capt. Vikas Gupta, Noida V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3373/DEL/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 114 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6957 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 13-04-2010
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2008
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K CHAND

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 3373/DEL/2008 A.Y. 2003-04 1 IN THE INCOMETAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3373/DEL/2008 A.Y. : 2003-04 CAPT. VIKAS GUPTA, VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 224, SECTOR-28, NOIDA XXX, NEW DELHI [PAN/GIR NO. ADMPG0569M] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI N.K. CHAND, SR. DR O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA : AM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R DATED 08.07.2008 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS)-XXX, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. THIS CASE WAS LISTED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL ON 13-04-2010 AND FOR THIS DATE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT BY REGISTE RED POST TO THE ASSESSEE. TODAY I.E. ON 13-04-2010 WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED O N BOARD, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOU RNMENT HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL DESPITE THE SERVICE OF NOTICE UPON THE ASSESSEE. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEA L; HENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY ITA NO. 3373/DEL/2008 A.Y. 2003-04 2 THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PRO SECUTION. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTH ER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LO RDSHIPS 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 THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION 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 HEARING OF THE REFE RENCE, 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 B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HE ARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THA T DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UN-ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. ITA NO. 3373/DEL/2008 A.Y. 2003-04 3 3. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRED, SHALL BE FREE TO MO VE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON -COMPLIANCE ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DISMISSED, FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13/04/2010 UPON CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- [C.L. SETHI) [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 13/04/ 2010 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES