Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

Income Tax Officer (TDS),Income Tax Office,Sector 14 Hisar-125001 VS. Superintendent (DDO),Department of Plant Breeding,C/o Anil Aggarwal & Co., C.A.,22, Green Park, Hisar - 125001
July, 07th 2012
             IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                    DELHI BENCH `G' NEW DELHI

        BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                              AND
          SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                           I.T.A.No.4820/Del/2011
                          Assessment Year : 2006-07

                           I.T.A.No.4821/Del/2011
                          Assessment Year : 2007-08

                           I.T.A.No.4822/Del/2011
                          Assessment Year : 2008-09

                           I.T.A.No.4823/Del/2011
                          Assessment Year : 2009-10

                           I.T.A.No.4824/Del/2011
                          Assessment Year : 2010-11

Superintendent (DDO),          Vs     Income Tax Officer (TDS),
Department of Plant Breeding,         Income Tax Office,
C/o Anil Aggarwal & Co., C.A.,        Sector 14, Hisar-125001
22, Green Park, Hisar - 125001
(PAN RTKDO2688A)
(Appellant)                             (Respondent)
                               Appellant by: None
                          Respondent by : Smt. Surjan Mohanty, Sr.DR






                                 ORDER

PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

        The above appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order of

CIT(A), Rohtak dated 24.8.2011 pertaining to Asstt. Years 2006-07 to 2010-

2011.
                                      2             ITA No.4820/Del/2011& Ors.


2.    This case was initially fixed for hearing on 5.1.2012 and on the

request of the assessee's counsel was adjourned to 4.7.2012 and both parties

were informed. Today on 4.7.2012, no one was present on behalf of the

assessee nor any request for adjournment was placed before the Bench. Smt.

Mohanty, Senior DR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue at the time of

hearing.

3.    It appears that the assessee is not interested in getting the appeals

prosecuted. 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 appeal 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.
                                         3            ITA No.4820/Del/2011& Ors.







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 Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for

the purpose of adjudication of the appeal.

6.        In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed for non-

prosecution.

          Order pronounced in the open court on 4.7.2012.


      Sd/-                                               Sd/-
 (S.V. MEHROTRA)                               (CHANDRA MOHAN GARG)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                   JUDICIAL MEMBER

DT. 4TH JULY, 2012
`GS'

Copy forwarded to:-

     1.      Appellant
     2.      Respondent
     3.      CIT(A)
     4.      CIT 5. DR                                              By order


                                                                Asstt. Registrar
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting