Shri Inderjeet Singh Chadha, Moradabad V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 667/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8036 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 21-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SYED NASIR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I.C. SUDHIR , JUDICIAL M EMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 667 TO 671 /DEL/ 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2006 - 07 TO 2009 - 10 & 2011 - 12 INDERJEET SINGH CHADHA , 455, CIVIL LINES, MORADABAD. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 29, NEW DELHI GIR/PAN : ACKPC9646G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. SYED NASIR, CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING 21.04.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 27.04.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A. M. : THESE APPEALS, BY THE ASSESSEE, ARE DIRECTED AGAINST A COMMON ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) - 30, NEW DELHI , DATED 19.11.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2006 - 07 TO 2009 - 10 & 201 1 - 12 . 2. EARLIER ON 05.04.2016, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED UPO N, NONE RESPONDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR 21.04.2016 BY ISSUING NOTICES TO THE PARTIES THROUGH RPAD . HOWEVER, DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE THROUGH RPAD AT THE ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE A SSESSEE IN COLUMN 10 OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL IN FORM NO. 36., N ONE PUT IN APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NO APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF HEARING HAS BEEN RECEIVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT GIVES AN IMPRESSION THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN P URSUING ITS APPEAL S . CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND KEE PING IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF R ULE 19(2) OF THE IN COME - TAX( APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ) RULES , 1963 AS WERE 2 CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), THE ASSESSEE S APP EAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) HAS HELD AS UNDER: '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 REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. ' 4. SIMILARLY , HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNED THE REFERENCE UNANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE. 5. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUP REME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477 - 478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 6. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITE D SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE ABOVE APPEAL S FOR NON - PROSECUTION. BEFORE PARTING, WE ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED, THEN HE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MOVING AN APPROPRIATE PETITION. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. THE DECISION IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 7 T H APRIL , 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - ( I.C. SUDHIR ) ( O.P. KANT ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 2 7 T H APRIL , 2016 . RK/ - COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI