Rajbir Singh Verma, New Delhi v. JCIT, New Delhi

ITA 614/DEL/2016 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2016 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 61420114 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN ABPPV2450F
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 614/DEL/2016
Duration Of Justice 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant Rajbir Singh Verma, New Delhi
Respondent JCIT, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 21-10-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC 1
Tribunal Order Date 21-10-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 06-09-2016
Next Hearing Date 06-09-2016
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 05-02-2016
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-612/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) RAJBIR SINGH VERMA WZ-1253 NANGAL RAYA NEW DELHI-110046. PAN-ABPPV2450F ( APPELLANT) VS ITO WARD-49(4) NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .NO.-613/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2010-11) RAJBIR SINGH VERMA WZ-1253 NANGAL RAYA NEW DELHI-110046. PAN-ABPPV2450F ( APPELLANT) VS ITO WARD-27(4) NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .NO.-614/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2010-11) RAJBIR SINGH VERMA WZ-1253 NANGAL RAYA NEW DELHI-110046. PAN-ABPPV2450F ( APPELLANT) VS ITO RANGE-27 NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH.ANIL SHARMA SR.DR ORDER ALL THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 08.12.2015 OF THE CIT( A)-17 NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO 2009-10; 2010-11; AND 2010-2011 AYS RESPECTIVELY ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. HOWEVER NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. THE APPEALS WERE PASSED OVER TWICE. EVEN IN THE THIRD ROUND THE POSITION REMAINED THE SAME AS NEITHER THE ASSESSEE IS REPRESENTED NOR THERE IS ANY ADJOURNMENT ON RECORD. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT T HE NOTICE HAS BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 29.07.2016 AT THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO.10 DESPITE THIS THE SAID NOTICE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED . ACCORDINGLY IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CAS E IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE PR ESENT APPEALS. ACCORDINGLY IN DATE OF HEARING 06.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21.10.2016 I.T .A .NO.-612 TO 614/DEL/2016 PAGE 2 OF 2 THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTATION OR PETITION SEEKI NG TIME THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE LEFT IS TO DISMISS THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN L IMINE. SUPPORT IS DRAWN FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNALS IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJ IRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). 3. BEFORE PARTING IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THAT IN CAS E THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPR ESENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY IF SO ADVISED TO PR AY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING IT SELF IN THE OPEN COURT. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE D ISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 1 ST OF OCTOBER 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDI CIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI