Vidya Mandir, Faridabad V. ACIT, Faridabad

ITA 4577/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53427 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MONGA
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH I: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.4577/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 VIDYA MANDIR VS. ACIT, SECTOR 15A CIRCLE-1 FARIDABAD FARIDABAD AAAAV2400L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.K. MONGA, SR . DR ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF L D. CIT(A), FARIDABAD WHEREBY CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY O N ADDITION OF ` 17,18,050/- ON ACCOUNT OF ADMISSION FEE U/S 271(1)(C) HAS BEEN CHALLENGED. 2. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE, NOBODY ATTENDED AT THE TIME WHEN CASE WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING. IT IS, THEREFORE, INFE RRED THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE PRESENT APPEAL. ITA NO. 4577/DEL-2011 2 3. HENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION, FINDING SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWI NG DECISIONS : 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANO THER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT; 223 ITR 480(M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT T HE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE , FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STE PS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTIP LAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEA RING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHE RENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FIELD BY THE REVENUE AS UN - ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. ITA NO. 4577/DEL-2011 3 5. IN THE RESULT, WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTE D AND DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COUR T SOON AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 15.12.2011. SD/- SD/- (K.D. RANJAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (U.B.S. BEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 15.12.2011 VEENA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.