Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Ram Pratap Yadav, New Delhi vs Assessee

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal27 March 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may dismiss an assessee's appeal for non-prosecution where, on the date of hearing, neither the assessee nor any representative appears and no adjournment request has been made; an appeal does not stand merely because it was filed, but requires the appellant to effectively pursue it. The dismissal is without prejudice to the assessee moving the Tribunal to recall the order by explaining the reasons for non-appearance, and the order will be recalled if the Bench is satisfied with those reasons.

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

Judgment

As delivered

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALDELHI BENCH "F": NEW DELHIBEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERANDSHRI A. T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 5884/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2004-05) ITA No. 5885/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2005-06) ITA No. 5886/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) ITA No. 5887/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) ITA No. 5888/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) ITA No. 5889/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) ITA No. 5890/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2010-11)

Ram Pratap Yadav, ACIT B-3, 895, Ward-8, Central Circle-22, Hilltop Apartment, Vs. New Delhi Mehrauli, New Delhi ABTPY7978B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : None Respondent by : Sh. Vikram Sahay, Sr. DR.

Date of Hearing 27.03.2015 Date of pronouncement 27.03.2015

ORDER

PER BENCH These appeals preferred by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld CIT(A)-II, New Delhi for the Assessment Years 2004-05 to 2010-11.

2. Today, i.e. on 27.03.2015 when these cases were 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 these appeals; hence, the appeals 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 decisions:-

(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."

Page 2 of 2 (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.

(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, these appeals filed by the assessee are 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 appeals are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.03.2015.

-Sd/- -Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) (A. T. VARKEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated:27/03/2015

A K Keot

Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

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