Ester Industries Ltd., V. JCIT, Spl. Range-26,

ITA 3979/DEL/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0315 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 08-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2005
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BANITA DEVI NAOREN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 3979/DEL/2005 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1998-99 M/S ESTER INDUSTRIES LIMITED, 75-76, AMRIT NAGAR, NEW DELHI 110 003. VS. JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPL. RANGE-26, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MS BANITA DEVI NAOREN, SR.DR O R D E R PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS DI RECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), DATED 4 TH MARCH, 2002 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 28 TH JANUARY, 2011. HOWEVER, NONE WAS PRESENT ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEAR ING I.E., 8 TH MARCH, 2011. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, WE PRESUME TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. CONSIDERING THESE FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE ITAT RU LES AS WERE CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. L TD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND M.P.HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKA R 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. 2 2. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08.03. 2011. SD/- SD/- [SHAMIM YAHYA] [I.P. BANSAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 08.03.2011. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES