INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH "F": NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 1439/Del/2018
(Assessment Year: 2014-15)
Komal Singh, Vs. ITO,
R/o. H. No. 36, Shiv Awasiya Ward-3(2),
Colony, Bulandhar, Uttar Bulandshar
Pradesh
PAN: EGOPS2240Q
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : None
Revenue by: Shri N.K.Bansal, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing 23/08/2018
Date of pronouncement 10/10/2018
ORDER
PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M.
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A),
Alilgarh dated 15.11.2017 for the Assessment Year 2014-15.
2. Today, i.e. on 23.08.2018 when this case was called on board, none
appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has
been filed before the Tribunal. It seems that the assessee is not
interested in prosecuting the appeal; hence, the appeal filed by the
assessee is liable to be un-admitted and dismissed for non-prosecution.
In our above view, we find support from the following decisions:-
(i). In the case of CIT Vs. 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
pursuing it."
(ii). In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 ITR
480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of
assessee in default made following observations in their order:
Page | 1
"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.
(iii). In the case of CIT Vs. 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.
3. Therefore, keeping in view the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is
dismissed for non-prosecution. The assessee, if so advised, shall be free
to move this Tribunal praying for recalling of this order and explaining the
reasons for non-compliance etc. and if the Bench is so satisfied about the
reasons etc, then this order shall be recalled.
4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10/10/2018.
-Sd/- -Sd/-
(AMIT SHUKLA) (PRASHANT MAHARISHI)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated:10/10/2018
A K Keot
Copy forwarded to
1. Applicant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT (A)
5. DR:ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT, New Delhi
Page | 2
|
