S.P. Nigam, V. ACIT, CC-13,

ITSSA 435/DEL/2005

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Shri S.P. Nigam against an order from the CIT(A) dated 18th October 2005, concerning a block period from 01.04.1996 to 15.07.2002. The appeal was repeatedly adjourned at the request of the assessee's counsel and ultimately dismissed due to the absence of the assessee's representative on multiple occasions. The tribunal referenced several precedents to support the decision to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution, emphasizing the importance of actively pursuing an appeal rather than merely filing it.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 115883 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: DismissedAllowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 17-05-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2005
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another, Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd.
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘ I’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A NO. 435/Del/2005 Block Period: 01.04.1996 to 15.7.2002 Shri S.P. Nigam, Vs. ACIT, C-3/202, Capital Apartments, Central Circle 13, Vasundhra Enclave, New Delhi. New Delhi. ACAPN9800D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Mohnish Verma, DR ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. It is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 18 th October, 2005 for block period 01.04.1996to 15.07.02. 2. The present appeal has been adjourned at the request of assessee’s counsel several times. Earlier this appeal was fixed on7th July, 2010 when it was adjourned on 11 th August, 2010 on the ground that assessee’s counsel was busy in another Court. The date has duly been taken note of by the Representative of the assessee. However, on 11 th August, 2010 none was present on behalf of assessee as the case was called for hearing three times. 3. In this view of the situation, we are of the opinion that assessee is not interested in pursuing the present appeal. Hence, the appeal filed by IT(SS)A No. 435/D/05 2 the assessee is liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution, finding support from the following decisions: 1. “In the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that: “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” 2. In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order: “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.” 3. In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as un-admitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.” 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed, for non-prosecution. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 11.8.10 (R.C. SHARMA) (I.P. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 11.8.10 *Kavita Chopra IT(SS)A No. 435/D/05 3 Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order, DEPUTY REGISTRAR