Mr. B.R. Malik, Rohtak V. ITO, Sonepat

ITA 3631/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0329 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS ANUSHA KHURANA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH `A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA ITA NO. 3631 (DEL)2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 MR. B.R. MALIK, PROP. BALAJI ENTERPRISES INCOME TAX OFFICER, ISMAILA, R/O 22, SECTOR 14, ROHTAK. V. WARD 4, SONIPAT, ROHTAK. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MRS. ANUSHA KHURANA, SR.DR ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, J.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SENDING NOTICE FOR HEARING, WHICH HAS NOT RETURNED UNSERVED. THEREF ORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320(DEL), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UN-ADMITTED. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NON- ITA NO. 3631(DEL)09 2 COMPLIANCE ETC. AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED AB OUT THE REASONS ETC., THEN THIS ORDER SHALL BE RECALLED. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.03.2011. SD/- SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 03.03.2011 *RM COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR .