Mayar Health Resorts Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5109/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8010 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DAM KANUNJANA SENIOR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.5109/DEL./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ITA NO.6228/DEL./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) M/S. MAYAR HEALTH RESORTS LTD., VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 6 (1), PLOT NO.A, NEW DELHI. BASANT LOK COMMUNITY CENTRE, VASANT VIHAR, NEW DELHI 110 057. (PAN : AADCM6414C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI P. DAM KANUNJANA, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 18.05.2016 DATE OF ORDER : 18.05.2016 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT, M/S. MAYAR HEALTH RESORTS LTD. (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE) BY FILING THE PRESENT APPEALS SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.06.2012 AND 27.09.2013 PASS ED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-IX, NEW DELHI QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND 2009-10 RESPECTIVELY. ITA NO.5109/DEL./2012 ITA NO.6228/DEL./2013 2 2. IN THE PRESENT APPEALS, A PERUSAL OF THE FILE SH OWS THAT ON 02.09.2015, THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE BENCH AND THEREAFTER, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 21.09.2015 ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON WHICH DATE THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCT ION AND THUS, THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR 18.05.2016 AND NOTICE WAS ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE FOR 18.05.2016, BUT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT PREFERRED TO PUT IN HIS APPEARANCE HIMSELF OR THROUGH HIS AUTHORIZED REPRES ENTATIVE NOR SENT ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. SO, IT IS APPARENT ON REC ORD THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF THE PRESENT APP EAL. 3. KEEPING IN VIEW THE LEGAL POSITION THAT MERE ISS UANCE OF NOTICE DOES NOT AMOUNT TO ADMISSION OF APPEAL AND THIS ISS UE HAS BEEN SQUARELY DECIDED BY HONBLE ITAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULT IPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 (DEL.), THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE HER EBY DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION WITH LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE AN APPLICATION TO RECALL THE ORDER SUBJECT TO DEMONSTRATE THAT HE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FROM PUTTING HIS APPEARANCE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 4. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (N.K. SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 18 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016 TS ITA NO.5109/DEL./2012 ITA NO.6228/DEL./2013 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-IX, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.