M/s. Honeywell International (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3901/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0731 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 12-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-1 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3901/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 17, GROUND FLOOR, AMRIT HOUSE, SANT NAGAR, NEW DELHI. PAN : AABCA7954K VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-12(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: MS PRINCY SINGLA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 12.09.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12.09.2018 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 10.03.2015 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. ITA NO. 3901/DEL/2015 2 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TOD AY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FIL ED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION ALSO. THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE TO THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO.36 HAS BEEN RETURN ED WITH THE REMARK LEFT. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY NEW ADDR ESS WHERE THE NOTICE OF HEARING COULD BE SENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT A PPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. THE APPEA L FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PROSECUT ION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- 1. CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461, WHE REIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 4 80 (M.P.), WHEREIN, WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT, THEIR LORDSHIPS MADE THE FOLLO WING OBSERVATION:- 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 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 COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNIC ATION OR ITA NO. 3901/DEL/2015 3 INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS , TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW O F THE PROVISION OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) R ULES, 1963. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 2.09.2018. SD/- SD/- (K.NARASIMHA CHARY) (R.S. SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018 DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI