Chaman Lal, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3871/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 82001 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARMINDER KAUR
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K. , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO . 3871 / DEL / 201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 7 - 0 8 MR. CHAMAN LAL, 303, DOUBLE STOREY, WELCOME COLONY , SHAHDARA, DELHI VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 34(3), NEW DELHI (PAN ABZPL 5357 M ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SMT. PARMINDER KAUR, SR. D.R. ORDER PER SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K , J M : 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) - XXVII, NEW DELHI ON 02 .11.2011 U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 0 8 . 2. WHEN THE MATTER W AS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TODAY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION ALSO. EA RLIER, THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN SEVERAL ADJOURNMENTS. IN THESE ITA NO. 3871 /DEL /201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 7 - 200 8 2 CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN TERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON - PROSECUTION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: - I. CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR. [118 ITR 461] WHEREIN THEIR LORD SHIPS HAVE HELD: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. II. 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, TH EIR LORDSHIPS MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION: - IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE 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. III. 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 REMAIN 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 APPELLATE RULES, 1963. ITA NO. 3871 /DEL /201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 7 - 200 8 3 3. I N THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. TH E DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH NOVEMBER , 201 4 . SD/ - SD/ - ( J.S. REDDY ) (GEORGE GEORGE K.) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 19 TH NOVEMBER , 201 4 . AKS/ - COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CI T(A) 5. DR ASST . REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI