M/s Nobo Shoe Co. Pvt. Ltd.,, New Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1244/DEL/2010 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 124420114 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AABCN3344A
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 1244/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant M/s Nobo Shoe Co. Pvt. Ltd.,, New Delhi
Respondent ITO, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-10-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 04-10-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 04-10-2010
Next Hearing Date 04-10-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 19-03-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R. C. SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1244 /DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 M/S NOBO SHOE CO. PVT. LTD. VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER PLOT NO.37 POCKET 1 IIIRD FLOOR WARD 13(3) JASOLA NEW DELHI-25 NEW DELHI PAN NO.AABCN 3344A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. BANITA DEVI NAOREM SR. DR. ORDER PER R.C. SHARMA AM: THIS IS AN ASSESSEE'S APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF LD CIT(A)-XVI NEW DELHI DATED 06.01.2010 FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2001- 02. THIS APPEAL WAS LAST FIXED FOR HEARING ON 01.0 7.2010. THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED ON THAT DATE AND THE SAME WAS FIXED FOR 04.10.2010. ON 04.10.2010 ASSESSEE IS NOT PRESE NT. THERE IS NO APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT APPEARS THAT ASSESS EE IS NOT INTERESTED IN GETTING THE APPEAL PROSECUTED. HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT 223 IT R 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: IF THE PARTY AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF 2 THE PAPER BOOK SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFER ENCE THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 2. ITAT DELHI BENCH D IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD. OBSERVED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 STATE THAT MERE ISSUE OF NOTICE COULD NOT BY ITSELF MEAN THAT THE APPEAL HAD BEEN ADMITTED. THIS RULE ONLY CLARIFIES THE POSITION. THERE MIGHT BE VARIOUS REASONS WITH THE APPELLANT TO REMAIN ABSENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ONE OF THE REASONS MIGHT ALSO BE A DESIRE OR ABSENCE OF NEED T O PROSECUTE THE APPEAL OR LIABILITY TO ASSIST THE TRIBUNAL IN A PRO PER MANNER OR TO TAKE BENEFIT OF VAGARIES OF LAW. 3. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS THE APPEA L FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS UN-ADMITTED AND DISMISSED IN LIMINE. WE MAY LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESSEE E XPLAINS 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. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR NON P ROSECUTION. 5. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE OF HEARING I.E. 04.10.2009. SD/- SD/- ( C.L. SETHI ) ( R.C. SHARMA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 04.10.2009 NS 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).