Panipat Ch. Trust, Panipat v. DCIT, Panipat

ITA 3838/DEL/2008 | 1993-1994
Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 383820114 RSA 2008
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 3838/DEL/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant Panipat Ch. Trust, Panipat
Respondent DCIT, Panipat
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 17-02-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 17-02-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 17-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 17-02-2010
Assessment Year 1993-1994
Appeal Filed On 31-12-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI D.R.SINGH JM AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN AM ITA NO. 3838/DEL/2008 A.Y. 1993-94 PANIPAT CHARITABLE TRUST VS. DCIT PANIPAT C/O SWASTIKA SPINNING MILLS GT ROAD NEAR KHADI ASHRAM PANIPAT (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. D.M.KAR CIT D.R. O R D E R PER K.D. RANJAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE CIT (A) KARNAL IN APPEAL NO. IT/62/PPT/CIT(A)/KN L/2007-08 DATED 20.10.2008 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 1993-94. 2. THIS CASE WAS LISTED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL ON 17.2.2010 AND NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESEE FOR T HIS DATE THROUGH REGD. POST A.D. ON 21.1.2010. 2.1. TODAY I.E. ON 17.2.2010 WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED ON BOARD NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS A PPEAL HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE UNADMI TTED/DISMISSED FOR 2 NON-PROSECUTION. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW WE FIND SUPPOR T 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 THEI R LORDSHIPS 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 I NSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN T HEIR 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 HEAR ING OF THE REFERENCE 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 REV ENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY CO MMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNI CATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT 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 RUL ES 1963. 3. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THESE DECISIONS (SUPRA) THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESEE IS TREATED AS UNADMITTED/DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. WE MAY LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESS EE MOVES AN APPROPRIATE APPLICATION FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR NON APPEARANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED TH E ORDER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APP EAL. 3 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESE E IS TREATED AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.2.2010 IMMEDIA TELY AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. (D.R. SINGH) ( K.D. RANJAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER DATED: 17 TH FEBRUARY 2010 *MANGA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT (A); 5.DR 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR // TR UE COPY //