Mrs. Sudha Diwan, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5451/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1313 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 20-03-2013
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y S KAKKAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-5451/DEL/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2003-04) SUDHA DIWAN, VS ACIT, D-972, NEW FRIENDS COLONY, CIRCLE-22(1), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN-ADRPD6213A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: MS. Y.S.KAKKAR, SR. DR ORDER PER DIVA SINGH, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.09.2010 OF CIT (A)-XXV, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2007-08 ASSESS MENT YEAR. 2. HOWEVER AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESE NT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER TWICE. DESPI TE THE SAME, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMEN T HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE THE BENCH. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON AN EARLIER DATE I. E 06.07.2012, THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. SIMILARL Y ON 07.02.2011 ALSO IT WAS ADJOURNED ON ASSESSEES REQUEST. NOTICE FOR THE DA TE OF HEARING ITSELF HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 13.01.2013 AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN COLUMN NO- 10. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESU MED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT I.T.A .NO.-5451/DEL/2010 2 SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PRESENT APPEALS. ACCORDINGL Y, WE DISMISS THE APPEALS IN LIMINE. WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIB UNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 32 0 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). IN TH E SAID CASE WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THE HONBLE COURT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS IN THEIR ORDER. 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 REFERENC E, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. WE HASTEN TO ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS AB LE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING THEN IT MAY IF SO ADVISED PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER AND DECISIO NS ON MERITS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH OF MARCH 2013. SD/- SD/- (B.C.MEENA) (DIVA S INGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER DATED: 20/03/2013 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REG ISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI