Ajit Singh Bagga, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 95/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5440 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVIKANT GUPTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.95/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 M/R. AJIT SINGH BAGGA, VS ASSTT. COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME-TAX, M-274, GURU HARKISHAN NAGAR, CIRCLE 38(1), NEW DE LHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN: AFAPB7451D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI RAVIKANT GUPTA, SR. DR ORDER DATE OF HEARING: 02.05.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02.05.2018 PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XXVIII), NEW DELHI (FOR SHORT CIT)A))} ) DATED 1.10.2014, ASSESSEE PREFERRED THIS APPEAL. 2. WHEN THE MATTER IS CALLED TODAY, THERE IS NO RE PRESENTATION FOR THE ASSESSEE. ON AN EARLIER OCCASION, I.E. ON 28.02.20 18, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NOTICE IS ISSUED IN THIS MATTER TO T HE ASSESSEE TO THE ADDRESSED FURNISHED IN FORM NO 36. WHEN THE NOTICE IS SENT T O PROPER ADDRESS OF THE 2 ASSESSEE AS PROVIDED BY THEM IN FORM NO. 36 THROUGH REGISTERED MAIL WITH POSTAGE PREPAID, IF THE ASSESSEE WAS TO BE FOUND TH EREIN THE NOTICE WOULD HAVE BEEN SERVED. IF FOR ANY REASON THE ASSESSEE IS ABSE NT TEMPORARILY, IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE ARRANGEMENT WITH THE POSTAL DEPART MENT EITHER TO DELIVER IT TO SOME OTHER PERSON, OR TO RE-DIRECT IT TO AN ADDRESS WHERE THE ASSESSEE COULD BE FOUND OR TO DETAIN THE MAIL DELIVERY THE ASSESSEE CO MES BACK AND CLAIMS THE SAME. EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE SHIFTS FROM THAT PLACE, IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO NOTIFY THE NEW ADDRESS EITHER TO THE REVENUE OR TO THE TRI BUNAL OR TO THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT. OBVIOUSLY THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT TAKEN AN Y OF THESE STEPS AND THE NON-SERVICE OF NOTICE IN THIS MATTER IS SOLELY ATTRI BUTABLE TO THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO OPTION, BUT T O INFER THAT THE ASSESSEE LOST INTEREST IN THIS MATTER, AND WE ARE LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO HOLD THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FO R NON PROSECUTION. WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX VS MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL) WHEREIN THERE WAS NO REPRESE NTATION FOR THE APPELLANT IN THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED AS TO WH Y THE APPELLANT HAD CHOSEN TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RUL ES, 1963. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISION, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 4. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRE, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON -COMPLIANCE ETC. 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND MAY, 2018. (G.D. AGRAWAL) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2 ND MAY, 2018 VJ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR