Metro Communications, Ghaziabad V. ACIT, Noida

MA 665/DEL/2018

AI Insights

The case involves Metro Communications, the appellant, who filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking to recall an ex-parte order previously passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The original appeal was dismissed due to non-prosecution, and subsequent attempts to engage the appellant in the proceedings were unsuccessful as no representative attended despite several notices. The Tribunal, after considering the lack of attendance and representation from the appellant, decided to dismiss the application for want of prosecution.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 112986 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 5 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 16-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 24-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

1 | Page IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “FRIDAY/C” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR.B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No.-665/Del/2018 [In ITA No.3289/Del/2016] [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Metro Communications, Plot No.33, Commercial Block, 2 nd Floor, Sector-14, (Behind Wave Cinema), Kaushambi, Ghaziabad PAN-AAMFM7625D vs ACIT, Circle-1, Noida. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 17.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 05.04.2023 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present Miscellaneous Applications (M.A.) has been filed by the assessee seeking recalling of the ex-parte order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.3289/Del/2016 pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11 vide order dated 30.05.2018. 2. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. It is seen from the record that no one has been attending the proceedings since 03.12.2021 on behalf of the assessee. Despite various notices sent at the address as provided in the application, no one has attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. Under these facts, the application was taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee. 3. Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue has submitted that the assessee has been thoroughly negligent during the proceedings. On the earlier occasions, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution and now also there is no 2 | Page representation on behalf of the assessee. He therefore, prayed that application filed by the assessee be dismissed. 4. We have heard Ld. Sr.DR and perused the material available on record. It is seen from the records that despite various opportunities provided to the assessee, no one has attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. The assessee should have taken steps for attending the hearing of the application. Under these facts, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee, is dismissed for want of prosecution. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 05 th April, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (DR.B.R.R.KUMAR) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER * Amit Kumar * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI