M/s. MSX Mall Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4861/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2852 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 15-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : C , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I.C. SUDHIR , JUDICIAL M EMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4861 /DEL/ 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 M/S. MSX MALL PVT. LTD., C/O - R.K. TULI & ASSOCIATES, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 11/37, GROUND FLOOR, OLD RAJENDER NAGAR, NEW DELHI VS. DCIT, CIRCLE - 6(1), NEW DELHI PAN : AABCN8537B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. ATIQ AHMAD, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 15.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16.06.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT , A. M. : THIS APPEAL, BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) IX, NEW DELHI, DATED 26.06.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. N OTICE OF HEARING FOR 15.06.2017 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD ON 26.04.2017 AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FORM NO. 36 VIDE COLUMN NO. 10 WHICH HAS BEEN RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITY WITH THE REMARK NO SUCH COMPANY AT THIS ADDRESS . IT IS, THUS, INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF HIS APPEAL, THER EFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO SEND THE NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN ON THE SAME ADDRESS. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RU LES, 1963 AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) HAS HELD AS UNDER: 2 ITA NO . 4861/DEL/2014 'IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS 'TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. ' 4. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE A SSESSEE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477 - 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE ABOVE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. BEFORE PARTING, WE ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED, THEN IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MOVING AN APPROPRIATE APPLICATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION THE DECISION IS PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 6 T H JUNE , 201 7 . S D / - S D / - ( I.C. SUDHIR ) ( O.P. KANT ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 6 T H JUNE , 201 7 . RK / - COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI