Orient Supply Enterprise, Ahmedabad vs Assessee
- CitationITA No. 745/Ahd/2011
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal dismisses an appeal for non-prosecution where the notice of hearing was returned unserved, no one appeared on the date of hearing, no adjournment was sought, and the assessee had not furnished a current address, indicating disinterest in pursuing the appeal. Following the Delhi Bench decision in CIT v. Multiplan India (Pvt) Ltd., the Tribunal holds that such circumstances justify dismissal, while leaving the assessee free to seek recall of the order on showing sufficient cause for its non-appearance.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Before: Shri Shailendra Kr. Yadav, Judicial Member and Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member
ITA No. 745/Ahd/2011 Assessment Year 2006-07
M/s. Orient Supply Dy. Commissioner of Enterprise Income Tax, Circle-10, CJD W ing, Ground floor, Vs Ahmedabad Madhusudan House, (Respondent) Navrangpura, Ahmedabad PAN: AAAFO7177L (Appellant)
Revenue by: Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr.D.R. Assessee by: None
Date of hearing : 30-12-2014 Date of pronouncement : 09-01-2015
आदे श/ORDER
PER : ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmedabad dated 03-01-2011 for A.Y. 2006-07.
I.T.A No. 745/Ahd/2011 A.Y. 2006-07 Page No 2 M/s. Orient Supply Enterprise vs. DCIT
2. In this case, notice fixing hearing on 30-12-2014 was sent to Assessee on 14/11/2014 through registered A.D. but the notice was returned un-served by postal authorities. On the date of hearing i.e. on 30- 12-2014 none appeared on behalf of Assessee nor any adjournment application was filed on behalf of the assessee. Assessee has also not placed on record its present address and this indicates that the assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the appeal, therefore following the decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (Pvt) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), we dismiss the appeal of the assessee. The assessee shall however be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for recalling of this order, if prevented by sufficient cause for non-appearance on the date of hearing.
3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in open court on the date mentioned hereinabove at caption page
Sd/- Sd/-
(SHAILENDRA KR. YADAV) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad Dated 09/01/2015 ak आदे श कȧ ूितिलǒप ूितिलǒप अमेǒषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
1. Assessee
2. Revenue
3. Concerned CIT
4. CIT (A)
5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. Guard file.
By order/आदे श से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद
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