Surjeet Singh Mehar, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 5173/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 517320114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 10-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROBIN RAWAL

Judgement Text

ITA NO . 5 173 /D EL/ 20 1 4 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC - 2 , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO . 5 173 /DEL/20 1 4 A.Y. : 20 0 7 - 0 8 SURJEET SINGH MEHAR, C/O PARM & SMRN, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 24, GOPALA CHAMBER, 76 - A, RANI JHANSI ROAD, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI 110055 (PAN:ALUPM1044P) VS . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 1 ( 3 ), NEW DELHI E - 2 BLOCK, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAWAN, CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI 1 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SH. ROBIN RAWAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 10 . 0 7 .201 5 DATE OF ORDER : 10 . 0 7 .201 5 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 7 . 4 . 20 1 4 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , X XII , NEW DELHI FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR 20 0 7 - 0 8 . 2. IN THIS CASE THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE A SSESSEE FOR HEARING BY REGD. AD POST FOR TODAY I.E. 10 . 0 7 .201 5 AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FORM NO. 36 VIDE COLUMN NO. 10 . I HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS AND FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY FRESH ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE. IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO ISSUE NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN ON THE SAME ADDRESS. 3 . ON 10 .0 7 .201 5 , NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDED THE HEARING AND ALSO NOT FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT . IT IS THUS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF H IS APPEAL. I FIND FROM THE RECORDS THAT THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN TIME BARRED AND NO APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION HAS BEEN FILED. ITA NO . 5 173 /D EL/ 20 1 4 2 4 . HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND FOLLOWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL INCLUDING THAT OF MULTIPLAN INDI A LTD. : 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND HON BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT S DECISION IN ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), I TREAT TH IS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE SAME. I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESS EE EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR NON APPEARANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MATTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL. 5 . AS A RESULT, THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 .0 7 .2015 . SD/ - [ H.S. SIDHU ] JUDICIAL MEMBER SR BHATNAGAR DATE: 10 . 0 7 .2015 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES