M/s Glitz Financial Services ITO, (P) Ltd., Flat No.26, DDA Flats. Ward-12 (2), New Delhi. VS. Shivalik Road, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi.
October, 16th 2013
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH `C' NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Assessment year : 2003-04
M/s Glitz Financial Services ITO,
(P) Ltd., Flat No.26, DDA Flats. Ward-12 (2),
Shivalik Road, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi.
New Delhi. V.
PAN /GIR/No.AABCG 8658-G
Appellant by : None
Respondent by : Shri Satpal Singh, Sr. DR.
PER TS KAPOOR, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld
CIT(A) dated 6.7.2012. None was present on the date of hearing. The
appeal was originally fixed for hearing on 24.12.2012 which got
adjourned on two occasions due to non functioning of Bench but was
finally fixed for 29.5.2013 on which date also nobody appeared and
further notice was issued for 7.10.2013 on which date also nobody
appeared. It appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting
the appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be
dismissed for non prosecution. In our above view, we find support from
the following decisions:-
2 ITA No5390/Del/2012
1. In the case of CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee & Another 118 ITR
461 (relevant pages 477 & 478) wherein their Lordships have
held that "The appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but
effectively of pursuing it."
2. In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker v. CWT 223 IR
480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of
assessee in default made following observations 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, this
court is not bound to answer the reference.
3. In the case of CIT v. Multiplan India Pvt. 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/applicant, nor any communication for adjournment
was received. There was no communication or information as to
why revenue choose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal
on the basis of inherent power treated the appeal filed by the
revenue as un-admitted in view of Rule 19 of the Appellate
Tribunal Rules, 1963.
Therefore, keeping in view the above, the appeal filed by the assessee
is dismissed for non prosecution.
2. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th day of October, 2013.
(RAJPAL YADAV ) (T.S. KAPOOR)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
3 ITA No5390/Del/2012
Copy forwarded to:-
1. The appellant
2. The respondent
3. The CIT
4. The CIT (A)-, New Delhi.
5. The DR, ITAT, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi.
(ITAT, New Delhi).
Date of hearing 7.10.2013
Date of Dictation 7.10.2013
Date of Typing 7.10.2013
Date of order signed by 7.10.2013
both the Members &
Date of order uploaded on net
& sent to the Bench concerned.