Neeraj Singh Sirohi, Hapur vs Assessee
- CitationI.T.A. No.4280 /Del/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's dismissal rests on the principle that where the assessee, after adjournments granted at its own request, fails to appear on the date of hearing and files no application for adjournment, it is to be inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal, and the appeal is accordingly treated as unadmitted and dismissed on that basis. A notice issued by the Tribunal does not by itself amount to admission of the appeal; the appeal is admitted only on the Tribunal's consideration at hearing, so an appeal treated as unadmitted may be dismissed as such without a merits determination. Where an appeal is dismissed as unadmitted, the assessee may seek its restoration by an application for recall of the order, which must demonstrate sufficient cause for its non-appearance at the hearing.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri P Dam Kanunjha, Sr. DR
Date of hearing : 11.03.2015 Date of pronouncement : 13.03.2013
ORDER
PER T.S. KAPOOR, AM:
This is an appeal filed by assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Ghaziabad dated 17.04.2013.
2. The appeal was fixed for hearing on 06.01.2014 which was adjourned to 06.05.2014 on the written request of Ld. D.R. on which date, the bench had not worked and the case was fixed for hearing on 14.10.2014. On 14.10.2014, the hearing was adjourned to 11.03.2015 on written request of Ld. A.R. and both the parties were informed in the open court about this date of hearing. On 11.03.2015, none was present on behalf of assessee nor any application for adjournment has been received. In view of above, it is implied that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of his appeal and 2 ITA No.4280/Del/2013
therefore, the appeal filed by assessee is unadmitted as mere issue of notice does not mean that appeal is admitted. We get support from the following case laws:
3. The ITAT in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) had occasion to consider the aspect of admissibility of appeal for hearing by observing as under:
"4. A judicial body has certain inherent powers. Decisions are taken for the purpose of proper and expeditious disposal of the appeals in present climate of mounting arrears partly due to appeals being filed without proper application of mind to facts and law and also at times for altogether extraneous considerations. Therefore, on the basis of inherent powers the Tribunal treated the appeal as unadmitted. The provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules support such action by stating that mere issue of notice could not by itself mean that appeal had been admitted. This rule only clarified the position. There is justification for rule 19(2). When the appeal is presented the same is accepted. Thereafter the concerned Clerk in registry verifies whether accompanying documents are received or not and if not a memo is issued calling for the papers which are also required to be attached to appeal memo. But at no stage usually the scrutiny is made on points whether the appeal memo and contents really conform to various Appellate Tribunal Rules or is it a legally valid appeal under section 253 of the Act. Those points if arising can be considered only at a time of hearing. And that is why the rule prescribes that mere issue of notice does not mean appeal is admitted. This according to us, is the Significance of rule 19(2).
4. Respectfully following the order of ITAT in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the assessee's appeal is treated as unadmitted and therefore, is dismissed. However, the assessee is at liberty to file an 3 ITA No.4280/Del/2013
application for recall of the order provided it can demonstrate that it was prevented by sufficient cause for not appearing at the time of hearing.
5. In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed as unadmitted.
6. Order as pronounced in the open court orally on the date of hearing is pronounced in writing on this 13th day of March, 2015.
Sd./- Sd./- ( G. C. GUPTA) (T.S. KAPOOR) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date: 13th March, 2015 Sp
Copy forwarded to:- 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT (A)-, New Delhi.
5. The DR, ITAT, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi.
True copy.
By Order
(ITAT, New Delhi).
S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 11/3 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 12/3 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the 3 JM/AM Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS 13/3 Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement 13/3 Sr. PS/PS 7 File sent to Bench Clerk 13/3 Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to Head 8 Clerk 9 Date on which file goes to A.R. 10 Date of Dispatch of order
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free