Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Ornet Developers, Ahmedabad vs Assessee

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal21 May 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may dismiss an appeal in limine where the appellant, having been served with a notice of hearing at the address furnished by it, fails to appear and the notice is returned unserved by the postal authorities, the assessee having not intimated any corrected or changed address, such that the Tribunal is entitled to conclude that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

Ornet Developers, Ahmedabad vs Assessee on 21 May, 2015 आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ 'बी', अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL " B " BENCH, AHMEDABAD सम ी जी.डी. अ वाल, उपा य (अहम. े ) एवं ी एस.एस. ग ोदारा, या यक सद य । BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL,VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) And SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.115/Ahd/2012 ( नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/s.Ornet Developers बनाम/ The Income tAx Officer C/o.Sanjay Patel,Parter Vs. Ward-9(1) 405, Olive Arcade Ahmedabad Opp.Samudra Complex Nr.Hotel Classic Gold Navrangpura Ahmedabad-380 009 थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . / PAN/GIR No. : AABFO 0157 B (अपीलाथ( /Appellant) .. ()*यथ( / Respondent) अपीलाथ( ओर से / Appellant by : -none- )*यथ( क, ओर से/Respondent by : Shri M.K.Singh, Sr.D.R. ु वाई क, तार1ख / सन Date of Hearing 21/05/2015 घोषणा क, तार1ख /Date of Pronounce ment 21/05/2015 आदे श / O R D E R PER SHRI G.D. AGARWAL, VICE-PRESIDENT(AZ): This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad dated 28/01/2011 for the Assessment Year 2008-09.

ITA No.115/Ahd/2012 M/s.Ornet Developers vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -2- 2. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant- assessee. On previous occasion, i.e. on 14/03/2012 also assessee did not appear. Last notice has been issued on 17/04/2015 fixing the date of hearing on 21/05/2015 as per address furnished by the assessee in Form No.36, which was sent through Registered Post (A.D.) to the assessee (as per evidence on record - RG 272927660 IN) and the same was returned by the Postal Authorities with remarks "LEFT". The assessee has not intimated correct/changed address to the Tribunal. Under these circumstances, we have no option but to dismiss the appeal since the assessee is not interested in pursuing with its appeal. Therefore, in view of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court decision in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holka vs. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) and of Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal decision in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (Pvt.) Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Delhi), we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. 3. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Court on 21st May, 2015 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.एस. ग ोदारा) (जी.डी.अ वाल) या यक सद य उपा य (अहम. े ) ( S.S. GODARA ) ( G.D. AGARWAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) Ahmedabad; Dated 21/ 05 /2015 ट1.सी.नायर, व. न.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS ITA No.115/Ahd/2012 M/s.Ornet Developers vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -3- आदे श क" # त%ल&प अ'े&षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ( / The Appellant 2. )*यथ( / The Respondent. 3. संबं9धत आयकर आयु;त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु;त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad 5. फाईल / Guard file. आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER, स*या<पत ) त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation .. 21.5.15(dictation-pad 1+ page attached at the end of this File) 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member ..21.5.15 3. Other Member... 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S................. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement...... 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S.......21.5.15 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk.....................21.5.15 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk..........................................

9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order.......................... 10. Date of Despatch of the 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