Mr. S.K. Bhatnagar, Ghaziabad v. ITO, Ghaziabad

ITA 2151/DEL/2013 | 1997-1998
Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 215120114 RSA 2013
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2151/DEL/2013
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant Mr. S.K. Bhatnagar, Ghaziabad
Respondent ITO, Ghaziabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 15-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 15-10-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 15-10-2013
Next Hearing Date 15-10-2013
Assessment Year 1997-1998
Appeal Filed On 12-04-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2151/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 SHRI SK BHATNAGAR ITO R-14/38 RAJ NAGAR WARD-2 (3) GHAZIABAD. V. GHAZIABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO. PAN /GIR/NO.AA AAAA AAPP PPPP PPB BB B- -- -9997 9997 9997 9997- -- -A AA A APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. NIDHI SRIVASTAVA SR. DR.. ORDER PER TS KAPOOR AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) DATED 5.12.2012. NONE WAS PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOR THERE WAS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT APPEAR S THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. HENC E THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PR OSECUTION. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING D ECISIONS:- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHE R 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIP S HAVE HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY OF PURSUING IT. ITA NO2151/DEL/2013 2 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKER V . CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE I NSTANCE 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 PR EPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFEREN CE THIS COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. 3 8 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 AD JOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMAT ION AS TO WHY REVENUE CHOOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. T HE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWER TREATED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE AS UN-ADMITTED IN VIEW OF RULE 19 OF THE APP ELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES 1963. THEREFORE KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. 2. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15TH DAY O F OCTOBER 2013. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV ) (T.S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 15.10.2013. HMS 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 DEL HI. TRUE COPY. ITA NO2151/DEL/2013 3 BY ORDER (ITAT NEW DELHI). DATE OF HEARING 15.10.2013 DATE OF DICTATION 15.10.2013 DATE OF TYPING 15.10.2013 DATE OF ORDER SIGNED BY 15.10.2013 BOTH THE MEMBERS & PRONOUNCEMENT. DATE OF ORDER UPLOADED ON NET 18.10.2013 & SENT TO THE BENCH CONCERNED.