Sharwan Kumar Singhal, New Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2209/DEL/2010 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 220920114 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAJPS3808B
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2209/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 10 month(s) 14 day(s)
Appellant Sharwan Kumar Singhal, New Delhi
Respondent ITO, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 24-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 24-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 24-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 24-03-2011
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 10-05-2010
Judgment Text
ITA NO. 2209/DEL/2010 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2209/DEL/2010 A.Y. : 2002-03 SHARWAN KUMAR SINGHAL VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER E-2/10 SHASTRI NAGAR WARD 19(3) NEW DELHI DELHI 110 052 [PAN : AAJPS3808B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SH. KISHORE B. (D.R.) O R D E R PER C.L. SETHI : JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORD ER DATED 16.2.2010 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS)-XXII NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. THIS CASE WAS EARLIER LISTED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 08.11.2010 IN RESPECT OF WHICH A NOTICE WAS SENT O N 28.9.2010. ON THAT DAY NONE FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS PRESENT. AGAIN A NOTICE FIXING OF DATE ON 24.3.2011 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 29.11.2010. THE NOTICE HAS NOT RETURNED BACK UNSERVED. TODAY I.E. ON 24-3-2011 WHEN THE CASE W AS 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 ASSES SEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL; HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY ITA NO. 2209/DEL/2010 2 THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON-PRO SECUTION. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTH ER REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LO RDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT; 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER: 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 THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFE RENCE THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HE ARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THA T DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UN-ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES 1963. ITA NO. 2209/DEL/2010 3 3. THE ASSESSEE IF SO DESIRED SHALL BE FREE TO MO VE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON -COMPLIANCE ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/3/2011 UPON CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- [SHAMIM YAHYA] [C.L. SETHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 24/3/2011 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI BENCHES