Sh. Rahul Seth, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4503/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 450320114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 01-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.4502 & 4503/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2007-08 RAHUL SETH, 14, CHINAR DRIVE, DLF CHHATARPUR FARMS, NEW DELHI. PAN : AASPS9459B VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.L. ANURAGI, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 01.10.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01.10.2015 ORDER THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 27.05.2014 IN RELATION TO ASSESSME NT YEARS 2006-07 & 2007-08. 2. WHEN THE MATTERS WERE CALLED UP FOR HEARING T ODAY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT FILED ANY ITA NO.4502 & 4503/DEL/2014 2 ADJOURNMENT APPLICATIONS ALSO. THE NOTICES OF HEARI NG SENT TO THE ASSESSEE HAVE NOT RETURNED UNSERVED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEA LS. THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED , FOR NON-PROSECUTION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIO NS:- 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 O F HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS , TREATED THE ITA NO.4502 & 4503/DEL/2014 3 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 APPEALS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 1 ST OCTOBER, 2015. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 01 ST OCTOBER, 2015. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI