Rajiv Beri, New Delhi vs Assessee
- CitationITA NO. 4586/Del/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may treat an appeal as unadmitted and dismiss it in limine, under Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules, where the assessee and his authorised representative fail to appear on the date of hearing, neither seek adjournment nor intimate a change of address, and the notice of hearing returned undelivered, from which the Tribunal infers the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Such a dismissal does not preclude restoration: if the assessee subsequently explains the reasons for non-appearance and the Bench is satisfied, the appeal may be recalled for adjudication.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
I.T.A. No. 4586/DEL/2013 A.Y. : 2009-10 Rajiv Beri VS. ACIT, CIRCLE 32(1), C/o G.Rai & Co., CR BLDG., 29A/1, Asaf Ali Road, NEW DELHI -2 New Delhi - 110002 (PAN: AAFPB7218L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Assessee by : None Department by : Sh. Vikram Sahay, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing: 13.01.2015 Date of Order : 13.01.2015 ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU : JM This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 1.5.2013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVI, New Delhi for the asstt. year 2009-10.
2. As per record, the aforesaid appeal has been filed on 26.11.2013 and fixed for hearing on 23.1.2014 which was adjourned to 28.7.2014 on the request of the assess and further adjourned due to non-functional of Bench for today i.e. 13.01.2015 for which Notice was sent to the assessee by Regd. AD Post for today i.e. 13.1.2015 at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 vide Column No. 10 while filing the appeal before the Tribunal, which was returned with the remarks "Office Left Without Address".
3. On 13.1.2015, neither the assessee nor his authorised representative attended the hearing and also not filed any application
1 ITA NO. 4586/Del/2013
for adjournment and application for change of his address. It is thus inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of his appeal.
4. Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following various decisions of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal including that of Multiplan India Ltd. : 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) and Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court's decision in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP), we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same. We may like to clarify that subsequently if the assessee explains the reasons for non appearance and if the Bench is so satisfied, the matter may be recalled for the purpose of adjudication of the appeal.
5. As a result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine.
6. Order pronounced in the Open Court soon after conclusion of hearing on 13th January, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
[T.S. KAPOOR] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER "SRBHATNAGAR"
Date: 13.1.2015 Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order,
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Benches
2
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