IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCHES : "D" NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT
AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No: 1013/Del/2012
Asstt. year : 2006-07
Legend Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO
st
68/11, 1 Floor, Ashok Nagar Ward-4(3)
Near Tilak Nagar New Delhi.
New Delhi 110 018
PAN AACL1569N
ITA Nos: 2424,2425,2426,2427,2439,2440/Del/2012
Asstt. years : 2003-04,2004-05,2006-07,2007-08,2008-09,2009-10
Legend Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT
60/28, Ground Floor, Central Circle
Ashok Nagar Ghaziabad.
Near Tilak Nagar
New Delhi 110 018
PAN AACL1569N
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : None
Respondent by :Sulekha Verma., CIT (DR)
Date of hearing : 14.5.2015
Date of pronouncement : 02.06.2015
ORDER
PER BENCH :
These seven appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 2006-
07,2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 are directed against
the order of the CIT(A).
ITA Nos. 1013, 2424, 2425, 2426, 2427, 2439,
2440/Del/2012
Legend Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO
2. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee appellant.
The assessee has not filed any application for adjournment of these appeals before
the Tribunal. On earlier many occasions the assessee has sought adjournment on
one pretext or the other. These appeals are being fixed right from 30th April, 2012
and even after expiry of three years, the assessee has not taken steps to represent
its case before the Tribunal.
3. In these facts we are of the view that the assessee does not seem to be
interested in the disposal of these appeals before the Tribunal. Hon'ble Madhya
Pradesh High Court in the case of Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP),
while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default, made the
following observations:-
"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."
4. ITAT Delhi Bench `D' in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd. 38 ITD
320 observed that the provisions of Rule 19 state that mere issue of notice could
not by itself mean that the appeals had been admitted. This rule only clarifies the
position. There might be various reasons with the appellant to remain absent at the
time of hearing. One of the reasons might also be a desire or absence of need to
prosecute the appeal or liability to assist the Tribunal in a proper manner or to take
benefit of vagaries of law.
5. Respectfully following the precedents, the appeals filed by the assessee are
treated as un-admitted and dismissed in limine. We may like to clarify that
subsequently, if the assessee explains the reasons for non-appearance and if the
2
ITA Nos. 1013, 2424, 2425, 2426, 2427, 2439,
2440/Del/2012
Legend Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO
Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpose of adjudication of
the appeals.
6. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed for non-
prosecution
Sd/- Sd/-
(T.S. KAPOOR) (G.C. GUPTA)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
Dated: 02.06.2015.
*veena
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR
6. Guard File
By Order
Dy. Registrar
Sl. Description Date
No.
1. Date of dictation by the Author 14.5.2015
2. Draft placed before the Dictating Member 14.5.2015
3. Draft placed before the Second Member
4. Draft approved by the Second Member
5. Date of approved order comes to the Sr.
PS
6. Date of pronouncement of order
7. Date of file sent to the Bench Clerk
8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk
9. Date of dispatch of order
3
ITA Nos. 1013, 2424, 2425, 2426, 2427, 2439,
2440/Del/2012
Legend Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO
4
|