TRS Woolen Mills (P) Ltd, v. ITO Ward 16 (1),

MA 402/DEL/2010 | 1998-1999
Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 40220124 RSA 2010
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number MA 402/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant TRS Woolen Mills (P) Ltd,
Respondent ITO Ward 16 (1),
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 16-09-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 16-09-2011
Assessment Year 1998-1999
Appeal Filed On 11-08-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH FRIDAY NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA MISCELLANEOUS APP. NO. 402/DEL/2010 ( IN I.T..A. NO. 2499/DEL/2007) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1998-99 M/S. TRS WOOLEN MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. INCOME-TAX OF FICER H-57 KRISHNA VIHAR WARD 16(1) POOTH KALAN NEAR DHARAM MARKET NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI ROHIT GARG ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV: JUDICIAL MEMBER THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS DIRECTED A T THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE POINTING OUT AN APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DATED 23.03.2009 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. THE APPLICATION WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 15.10.2010 AND A NOTICE THROUGH REGI STERED POST WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION O N 15.10.2010 AND HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 21.1.2011. A NOTICE THROUG H REGISTERED POST WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED F OR 18.3.2011 AND A FRESH NOTICE WAS ISSUED THROUGH REGISTERED POST. THE HEAR ING WAS ADJOURNED TO 2 15.7.2011. SERVICE OF NOTICE WAS EFFECTED BUT NO ON E AGAIN APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE HEARING WAS AGAIN ADJOU RNED TO 16.9.2011. NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN TH E TITLE OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THROUGH COURIER BUT AGAIN NO ONE HAS AP PEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. IN THE APPLICATION ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED THAT IT AT HAS REJECTED ITS FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL CHALLENGING REOPENING OF ASSESSMEN T ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS NOT PRESSED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE. THE DIRECTOR SHRI SHAM LAL S/O TIKKA RAM FILED AN AFFIDAVIT BEFORE TH E HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN AN APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE ITAT WHICH H AS BEEN WITHDRAWN FOR FILING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BEFORE THE ITA T. IN THE AFFIDAVIT HE DEPOSED THAT HE WAS PRESENT ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL WAS DULY PRESSED BY HIS COUNSEL. ARGUMENTS WERE ALS O TAKEN UP IN THE SUBMISSION. THIS AFFIDAVIT HAS NOT BEEN SWORN BEFOR E ANY OATH COMMISSIONER OR NOTARY. NO AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN FILE D IN SUPPORT OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MORE SO THE AFFIDAVIT O F THE COUNSEL WHO APPEARED BEFORE THE ITAT OUGHT TO BE FILED BECAUSE IT WAS A CONCESSION GIVEN BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WHO DID NOT PRESS THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE ANY A FFIDAVIT OR ANY OTHER 3 MATERIAL BEFORE US IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION RA THER FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE IT REVEALS THAT IT IS NOT INTERESTED IN P ROSECUTING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THEREFORE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION TH E APPLICATION IS REJECTED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.09.201 1 SD/- SD/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) ( RAJPA L YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R DATED: 16/09/2010 MOHAN LAL COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR