Vivek Sawhney, New Delhi v. ACIT, New Delhi

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `H: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L.SETHI JM & SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA AM I.T. A. NO.3528/DEL OF 2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SHRI VIVEK SAWHNEY ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME-TAX 24 KAMLA MARKET VS CIRCLE 37(1) NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI N.K. CHAND ORDER PER C.L. SETHI JM: THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 1 .06.2009 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A)-XXVIII NEW DELHI IN THE MATTER OF AN ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE AO U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 19 61 (THE ACT) PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. FROM ORDER SHEET ENTRIES IT IS SEEN THAT INITIA LLY CASE WAS FIXED ON 12.10.2009 WHICH WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF A SSESSEE COUNSEL. NOTICE FIXING THE APPEAL ON 25.2.2010 WAS ISSUED AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE THAT WAS DULY SERVED ON HIM BUT ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT ON THAT DATE ALSO. NOTICE ISSUED AGAIN TO THE ASSESSEE ON ADDRESS GIVEN IN MEMO OF A PPEAL FOR HEARING ON 15 TH APRIL 2010 I.E. TODAY HAS NOT RETURNED BACK. A T THE TIME OF HEARING NONE 2 APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICAT ION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. IT SEEMS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE CONSIDERING FACTS OF THE CASE AND KEEPIN G IN VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES 1962 AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. 38 ITD 320 WE TREA T THESE APPEAL AS UN- ADMITTED. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH APRIL 2010 IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE HEARING WAS OVER. (SHAMIM YAHYA) (C.L. SETHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 15 TH APRIL 2010 VIJAY COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-XXVIII NEW DELHI 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR