Shri Dinesh Kumar Mangla, Haryana v. ITO, Faridabad

ITA 3651/DEL/2015 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2015 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 365120114 RSA 2015
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 3651/DEL/2015
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant Shri Dinesh Kumar Mangla, Haryana
Respondent ITO, Faridabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-07-2015
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC 1
Tribunal Order Date 31-07-2015
Date Of Final Hearing 31-07-2015
Next Hearing Date 31-07-2015
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 05-06-2015
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC - 1 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL A CCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3651 /DEL/20 15 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 SH. DINESH KUMAR MANGLA R/O H. NO. 1025 VILLAGE PRITHLA DIST. PALWAL HARYANA - 121102 VS. IT O WARD - 1 ( 2 ) CGO COMPLEX NH - IV NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI OM PRAKASH MEENA SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 31.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31.07.2015 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) ON 17 . 04 .20 1 5 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10 - 11 . 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING TODAY NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY ADJOU RNMENT APPLICATION ALSO. THE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED . IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. THE APPEAL FILED ITA NO 3651 /DEL/1 5 2 BY THE ASSESSEE IS THEREFORE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. OUR ABOVE VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: - 1 . CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR. 118 ITR 461 WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSU ING IT. 2 . ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) WHEREIN WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT THEIR LORDSHIPS MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION: - IF THE PARTY AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENC E IS MADE FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE REFERENCE THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P.) LTD 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) WHEREIN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMA IN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UNADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION OF RULE 19 OF THE INCOME - TAX ( APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES 1963. ITA NO 3651 /DEL/1 5 3 3. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST JULY 201 5 . SD/ - (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31 ST JULY 2015 AKS COPY FORWARDED TO 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR DY. REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI