Nav Bharat Enterprises, Delhi V. AC IT, New Delhi

ITA 4684/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6900 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 02-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIMA BA RANWAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-II NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-4684/DE L/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2010-11) NAV BHARAT ENTERPRISES, D-57, ASHOK VIHAR, PHASE-I, DELHI-110052. PAN-AAGFN9491E (APPELLANT) VS ACIT, CIRCLE-19(1), NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE R EVENUE BY MS. ANIMA BARANWAL, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2015 OF CIT(A) -12, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. EVEN IN THE SE COND ROUND, THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME. THE RECORD FURTHER SHOWS THAT T HE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT A DEFECT IN THE APPEAL FEE ON 27.07.2015 TILL DATE THE DEFECT REMAINS NOT CURED. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PRESENCE OR REQUEST FOR ADJO URNMENT DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE ON 06.06.2016. IT CAN BE SAF ELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILE D. ACCORDINGLY THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE IN LIMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSION ER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). IT MAY BE FURTHER NOTED TH AT TILL THE DATE OF PASSING OF THIS ORDER, NO REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN PLA CED BY THE REGISTRY. 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CAS E THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPR ESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING, IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PR AY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING IT SELF IN THE OPEN COURT. DATE OF HEARING 02.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20.09.2016 I. T.A .NO.-4684/DEL/2015 PAGE 2 OF 2 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUD ICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI