Rajbir Singh Verma, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 612/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2917 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 06-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K JIWANT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.612 & 613/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 & 2010-11 RAJBIR SINGH VERMA, WZ, 1253, NANGAL RAYA, NEW DELHI. PAN: ABPPV2450F VS. ITO, WARD-49(4), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI V.K. JIWANT, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 20.03.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.03.2018 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 08.12.2015 IN RELATION TO T HE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 & 2010-11. ITA NOS.612 & 613/DEL/2016 2 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TOD AY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FIL ED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION ALSO. THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED. THIS IS A RECALLED MATTER IN WHI CH, EARLIER, THE MATTER WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE DUE TO THE NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE T IME OF HEARING. THE APPEALS WERE RESTORED ON MISCELLANEO US APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS ROUND THE MATTER GOT ADJOURNE D A COUPLE OF TIMES AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE LAST TIME BEING ON 20.12.20 17. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEALS. THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PROSECUTION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FIN DS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- 1. CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461, WHE REIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 4 80 (M.P.), WHEREIN, WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ITA NOS.612 & 613/DEL/2016 3 ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT, THEIR LORDSHIPS MADE THE FOLLO WING OBSERVATION:- IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REF ERENCE. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P. ) LTD, 38 ITD 320 (DEL.),WHEREIN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE O F HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS , TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW O F THE PROVISION OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) R ULES, 1963. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.03.201 8. SD/- SD/- [SUCHITRA KAMBLE] [R.S. SYAL] JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED, 21 ST MARCH, 2018. ITA NOS.612 & 613/DEL/2016 4 DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.