Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: form 3cd :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: VAT Audit :: cpt :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: VAT RATES :: empanelment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: due date for vat payment :: TDS
 
 
From the Courts »
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21
 CHAUDHARY SKIN TRADING COMPANY Vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-21
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 Deputy Director Of Income Tax Vs. Virage Logic International
 Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 International Taxation Vs. Virage Logic International India
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-06 Vs. Moderate Leasing And Capital Services Pvt. Ltd.
 ITO vs. Vikram A. Pradhan (ITAT Mumbai)

Ajay Goel, C-54, Vivek Vihar, New Delhi. Vs. ITO, Ward-35(1), New Delhi.
July, 29th 2015
        IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
            DELHI BENCH : SMC-I : NEW DELHI

     BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                          ITA No.777/Del/2014
                        Assessment Year : 2007-08

Ajay Goel,                         Vs.          ITO,
C-54, Vivek Vihar,                              Ward-35(1),
New Delhi.                                      New Delhi.

PAN : AADPG3182A


     (Appellant)                             (Respondent)

           Appellant by : None
           Respondent by: Shri Om Prakash Meena, Sr.DR

                                  ORDER


     This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the

CIT(A) on 22.11.2013 in relation to Assessment Year 2007-08.



2.   When the matter was called up for hearing today, no one has appeared

on behalf of the assessee. The assessee has not filed any adjournment

application also. Earlier, on 22.6.2015, when the matter was first posted for

hearing, the matter was adjourned to 28.07.2015 and a fresh notice of

hearing was sent to the assessee. In these circumstances, it appears that the
                                                              ITA No.777/Del/2014   2





assessee is not interested in prosecuting his appeal. The appeal filed by the

assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. Our

above view finds support from the following decisions:-

    1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & anr.', 118 ITR 461, wherein their
       Lordships have held:
           "The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but
           effectively pursuing it."

    2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT', 223 ITR 480 (M.P.),
       wherein, while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the
       assessee   in   default,   their   Lordships   made   the   following
       observation:-
           "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 reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference."

    3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd', 38 ITD
       320 (Del.),wherein the appeal filed by the revenue before the
       Tribunal, 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 unadmitted in view of the provision
       of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.
                                                             ITA No.777/Del/2014   3





3.     In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non-

prosecution.

       The decision was pronounced in the open court on 28th July, 2015.


                                                        Sd/-
                                                  (R.S. SYAL)
                                             ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: 28th July, 2015.

dk

Copy forwarded to

1.   Appellant
2.   Respondent
3.   CIT
4.   CIT(A)
5.   DR
                                           Dy. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Internet Marketing Website Marketing Internet Promotion Internet Marketing India Website Marketing India Internet Promotion India Internet Marketing Consultancy Website Marketing Consulta

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions