Shri Vinod Garg, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 659/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 65920114 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 22-03-2012
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR B R R KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO.659 & 660/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01 & 2001-02 SHRI VINOD GARG, INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WZ-430, MADIPUR VILLAGE, VS. WARD 19(3), NEW DELHI . NEW DELHI. PAN: AAPPG3274R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, SR. DR O R D E R PER K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2000-01 & 2001-02 ARISE OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XXII, NEW DELHI. 2. THE APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2001-02 WAS INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 17.08.2011 AND ON THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED SR. DR THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 6 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. THE APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2000-01 WAS FIXED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 12-4-2010. THEREAFTER ON FIVE OCCASIONS TH E APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. FROM 17.8.2011, TH E APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP WITH THE APPEAL FOR ASSTT. YEAR 2001-02. ON 6.09.2011 T HE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED 2 TO 29 TH NOVEMBER, 2011 ON THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED SR. D R. ON 29.11.2011 AGAIN THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 22.03.2012 WITH THE DIRECTION TO THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE BANK STATEMENTS AND C ERTAIN OTHER INFORMATION. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN THE OPEN COURT. 3. ON 22.03.2012, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEAR ING, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF H EARING AND NOR WAS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. IT APPEA RS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN GETTING THE APPEAL PROSECUTED. HONB LE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: 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 PAPER BOOK SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFER ENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 4. ITAT DELHI BENCH `D IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULT IPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) OBSERVED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME- TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, STATE THAT MERE ISSUE OF NOTICE COULD NOT BY ITSELF MEAN THAT THE APPEAL HAD BEEN ADMITTED. THIS RULE ONLY CLARIFIES THE POSITION. THERE MIGHT BE VARIOUS REASONS WITH THE ASSESSEE TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT A LSO BE A DESIRE OR ABSENCE 3 OF NEED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL OR LIABILITY TO ASS IST THE TRIBUNAL IN A PROPER MANNER OR TO TAKE BENEFIT OF VAGARIES OF LAW. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS UN-ADMITTED AND DISMISSED I N LIMINE. WE MAY LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINS THE REASONS FOR NON- APPEARANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE MA TTER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF BOTH THE APPEALS. 6. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND MARCH, 2012. SD/- SD/- (C.M. GARG) (K.D. RANJAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 22 ND MARCH, 2012. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.