Sh. Sumit Kumar Bagra, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 623/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 62320114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 04-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEEHAR RANJAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.623/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SUMIT KUMAR BAGRA, C/O M/S VAISHALI CREATION, B-12, HATHI KHANA, AZAD MARKET, 1 ST FLOOR, NEW DELHI. PAN : AFSAB5419C VS. ITO, WARD 39(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI NEEHAR RANJAN PANDEY, ADDL.CI T DATE OF HEARING : 17.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.06.2015 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 29.11.2013 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TOD AY, NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NO T FILED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION. THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED ITA NO.623/DEL/2014 2 UNSERVED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEARS THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED, FOR NON-PROSECUT ION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- 1. CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461, WH EREIN 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 480 (M.P.), WHEREIN, WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE 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 REFERENCE. 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 APPELLATE RULES, 1963. ITA NO.623/DEL/2014 3 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 7 TH JUNE, 2015. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17 TH JUNE, 2015. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI