Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
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) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Popular Search: TDS :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: empanelment :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: cpt :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: VAT RATES :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: due date for vat payment :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: form 3cd :: VAT Audit
From the Courts »
 Virag Tiwari Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-21 & Others
  Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT (Supreme Court)
 Order of a Four-Member Appellate Authority constituted under Chartered Accountants Act is Valid: Delhi HC
 Emami Infrastructure Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
  Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Bar Council of India vs. A. K. Balaji & Ors (Supreme Court)
 ITO vs. Venkatesh Premises Co-op Society Ltd (Supreme Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)

Wasan Exports (P) Ltd., 5, Aradhana Enclave, R. K. Puram, Ring Road, New Delhi Vs. ACIT Circle-18(1) New Delhi
August, 05th 2014
                          INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                             DELHI BENCH "H": NEW DELHI
                         SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                                    ITA No. 2197/Del/2013
                                    (Assessment Year: 2009-10)

                 Wasan Exports (P) Ltd.,            ACIT
                 5, Aradhana Enclave,           Vs. Circle-18(1)
                 R. K. Puram, Ring Road,            New Delhi
                 New Delhi
                 (Appellant)                         (Respondent)

                             Appellant by : None
                             Respondent by : Sameer Sharma, Sr. DR


      This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld CIT(A)-XXI,
New Delhi dated 01.02.2013 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.    Today, i.e. on 24.07.2014 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. 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
(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 IR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations 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, this court is not bound to answer the reference. Page No. 2 (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 assessee's appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.07.2014. -Sd/- -Sd/- (R.S. SAYAL) (A. T. VARKEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated:30/07/2014 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Content Management System development CMS development Content Management Solutions CMS Solutions Content Management Services CMS Services CMS Software

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