Coronation Construction Pvt. Ltd., V. ACIT, Circle-3(1),

ITA 3664/DEL/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4322 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 06-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 15-09-2005
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K RAVI RAM CHANDRAN
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH H DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JM AND SHRI K. D. RANJ AN, AM I. T. A. NO. 3664 (DEL) OF 2005. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02. M/S. CORONATION CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, A53, OKHLA IND. AREA, PHASE : II, VS. C I R C L E : 3 (1) V, N E W D E L H I. N E W D E L H I. P A N / G I R NO. AAA CC 0845 Q. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : N O N E; DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI K. RAVI RAM CHAN DRAN, SR. D.R.; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 1-02 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS)V, NEW DELHI. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 15/ 09/2005 AND WAS FIRST FIXED FOR HEARING ON 09 TH JANUARY, 2007, BUT WAS ADJOURNED TO 12 TH MARCH, 2007 AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION AS ON THAT DATE. ON 12/03/2007 THE CASE W AS ADJOURNED TO 1 ST MAY, 2007 AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. ON 1 ST MAY, 2007, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, N OBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR WAS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT RECEIVED. THE CASE WAS HEARD 2 I. T. A. NO. 3664 (DEL) OF 2005. AND DISPOSED OF VIDE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 1/05/20 07. THE ASSESSEE MOVED MISC. APPLICATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 1/07/2009 BEARING NO.378 (DE L) OF 2009. THIS MISC. APPLICATION WAS DISPOSED OF VIDE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 18/09/2009 RECALLING THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND FIXING I. T. APPEAL NO. 3664 (DEL) OF 2005 FOR HEARING ON 3/11/2009. THE CASE WAS SUBSEQUENTLY ADJOURNED TO 6/10/2010, 18/11/2010, 3/ 01/2011, BUT WAS ADJOURNED AS THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION. THE CASE WAS AGAIN FIXED FOR 6 TH APRIL, 2011, BUT WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING ON 6/04/2011, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN GETTING THE APPEAL PROSECUTED. HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN T HE CASE OF TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: 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 BOOK S O AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. ITAT DELHI BENCH D IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD. OBSERVED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 STATE THAT MERE ISSUE OF NOTI CE COULD NOT BY ITSELF MEAN THAT THE APPEAL HAD BEEN ADMITTED. THIS RULE ONLY CLARIFIES THE POSITIO N. THERE MIGHT BE VARIOUS REASONS WITH THE APPELLANT TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT ALSO BE A DESIRE OR ABSENCE OF NEED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL OR LIABILIT Y TO ASSIST THE TRIBUNAL IN A PROPER MANNER OR TO TAKE BENEFIT OF VAGARIES OF LAW. 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS UN- ADMITTED AND DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 3 I. T. A. NO. 3664 (DEL) OF 2005. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR NON-P ROSECUTION. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 06 TH APRIL, 2011. SD/- SD/- [ A. D. JAIN ] [ K. D. RANJAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 06 TH APRIL, 2011. *MEHTA * COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : - 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT, 4. CIT (APPEALS), 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT.