Shri Dinesh Kumar Mangla, Haryana V. ITO, Faridabad

ITA 3651/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 365120114 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 31-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH MEENA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC - 1 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, A CCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3651 /DEL/20 15 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 SH. DINESH KUMAR MANGLA R/O H. NO. 1025, VILLAGE PRITHLA, DIST. PALWAL, HARYANA - 121102 VS. IT O, WARD - 1 ( 2 ) , CGO, COMPLEX, NH - IV, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI OM PRAKASH MEENA, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 31.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31.07.2015 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) ON 17 . 04 .20 1 5 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10 - 11 . 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TODAY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY ADJOU RNMENT APPLICATION ALSO. THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED . IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. THE APPEAL FILED ITA NO 3651 /DEL/1 5 2 BY THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON - PROSECUTION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: - 1 . CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR. , 118 ITR 461, WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSU ING IT. 2 . ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT , 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), WHEREIN, WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT, THEIR LORDSHIPS MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION: - IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENC E IS MADE, 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 OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMA IN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME - TAX ( APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963. ITA NO 3651 /DEL/1 5 3 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST JULY , 201 5 . SD/ - (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31 ST JULY, 2015 AKS COPY FORWARDED TO 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI