M/s. Hotel The Ascent, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3487/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6865 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3487 & 3488/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 & 2010-11 HOTEL THE ASCENT, SARASWATI VIHAR, NEW DELHI. PAN : AAEFH2590Q VS. ITO, WARD-25(2), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI N.K. BANSAL, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 17.10.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17.10.2016 ORDER THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 12.03.2015 AND 01.07.2014 IN RELAT ION TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND 2010-11, RESPECTIVELY. 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TOD AY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FIL ED ANY ADJOURNMENT ITA NO.3487&3488/DEL/2016 2 APPLICATION ALSO. THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE TO THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO.36 HAS BEEN RETURN ED UNSERVED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK INCOMPLETE. NO NEW ADDRESS WHERE NOTICE OF HEARING COULD BE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEALS. THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PROSECUT ION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- 1. CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461, WHE REIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 4 80 (M.P.), WHEREIN, WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT, THEIR LORDSHIPS MADE THE FOLLO WING OBSERVATION:- 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 REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P. ) LTD, 38 ITD 320 (DEL.),WHEREIN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE O F HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ITA NO.3487&3488/DEL/2016 3 ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS , TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW O F THE PROVISION OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) R ULES, 1963. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 7 TH OCTOBER, 2016. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17 TH OCTOBER, 2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI