ITA NO. 5144/Del/2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH "D", NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A. No. 5144/Del/2012
A.Y. : 2009-10
Joginder Kalsan, VS. I.T.O., Ward(2),
H.No. 496, Sector-8, Karnal
U.E. Karnal-132001 (Haryana)
(PAN: APTPK3749J
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Assessee by : None
Department by : Sh. S.N. Bhatia, D.R.
ORDER
PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM
The assessee has filed this appeal against the order dated
17.7.2012 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),
Karnal.
2. This case was listed for hearing before the Tribunal on
13-1-2014 and for this assessee was informed. Today i.e. on
13-1-2014 when the case was called on board, none appeared on
behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been filed
before the Tribunal despite the service of notice upon the assessee. It
seems that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting his 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:
1
ITA NO. 5144/Del/2012
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.
3. The assessee, if so desired, shall be free to move this Tribunal
praying for recalling this order and explaining reasons for non-
compliance etc. then this order may be recalled.
2
ITA NO. 5144/Del/2012
4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is dismissed, for
non-prosecution.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13/1/2014, upon
conclusion of hearing.
Sd/- Sd/-
SUDHIR]
[I.C. SUDHIR] [SHAMIM YAHYA]
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Date 13/1/2014
"SRBHATNAGAR"
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A)
5. DR, ITAT
TRUE COPY
By Order,
Assistant Registrar,
ITAT, Delhi Benches
3
|
