Mr. Deepak Sethi, Gurgaon V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3899/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2881 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 06-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KR SHARMA

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 3899 & 3900/DEL/2014 A.YRS.: 2006-07 & 2007-08 MR. DEEPAK SETHI, VS. ITO, WARD 33(3), APARTMENT NO. 701, NEW DELHI BUILDING NO. B2, THE LEGEND, SECTOR-57, GURGAON HARYANA (PAN: ALZPS9878A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SH. ANIL KR. SHARMA, SR. DR O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THESE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGA INST THE SEPARATE ORDERS BOTH DATED 07.6.2014 OF THE LD. CIT(A) -XXVIII, NEW DELHI RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 & 2007-0 8 RESPECTIVELY. 2. IN THESE CASES THE NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE ASSE SSEE FOR HEARING BY REGD. AD POST FOR TODAY I.E. 06.06.2017 A T THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FORM NO. 36 VIDE COLUMN NO. 10. 3. ON 06.06.2017, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHO RISED REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDED THE HEARING AND ALSO NOT FILE D ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT BY THE ASSESSEE, HENCE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO SERVE THE NOTICE AGA IN AND AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, IT IS THUS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF HIS APPEALS. EVEN O THERWISE, THE PAGE 2 OF 2 PRESENT APPEALS ARE TIME BARRED BY 29 DAYS WHICH HAS N OT BEEN CONDONED BY THE BENCH TILL DATE. 4. HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND FOLL OWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL INCLUDING T HAT OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. : 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND HONBLE MADHYA PRAD ESH HIGH COURTS DECISION IN ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE TREAT THESE APPEALS AS UNADMITTED AND DI SMISS THE SAME. WE WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR NON APPEARANCE AND IF THE BE NCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MATTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE O F ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 06-06-2017. SD/- SD/- [O.P. KANT] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE:06/06/2017 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4.CIT (A) 5. DR , ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES