Shri Chandra Swami, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4527/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6747 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 27-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: F R MEENA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-II : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.4527 TO 4532 & 4533/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03 TO 2006-07, 2008-09 & 20 11-12 ITA NO.4565/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 CHANDRA SWAMI, C-18-19, QUTAB INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEW DELHI. PAN : ABJPS5374H VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI F.R. MEENA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.10.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27.10.2016 ORDER THIS BATCH OF EIGHT APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIR ECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2006-07, 2008-09, 2011-12 AND 2003-04, R ESPECTIVELY. ITA NO.4527 TO 4533 & 4565/DEL/2016 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 NOT BEEN RE TURNED UNSERVED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE I S NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEALS. THE APPEALS FILED BY THE A SSESSEE ARE, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PROSECUTION. MY AB OVE 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 O F HEARING NOBODY ITA NO.4527 TO 4533 & 4565/DEL/2016 3 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 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 2 7 TH OCTOBER, 2016. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 27 TH OCTOBER, 2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI