M/s. Rajan Suri (HUF) v. ACIT, Circle 32 (1), New Delhi
[Citation -2016-LL-0921-34]

Citation 2016-LL-0921-34
Appellant Name M/s. Rajan Suri (HUF)
Respondent Name ACIT, Circle 32 (1), New Delhi
Court ITAT-Delhi
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 21/09/2016
Assessment Year 2011-12
Judgment View Judgment
Bot Summary: ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri F.R. Meena, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 29.08.2016 Date of Order : 21.09.2016 ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 12.10.2015 of CIT(A)-18, New Delhi pertaining to 2011-12 assessment year on various grounds. No one was present on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing, the appeal was passed over. The record shows that the notice has been sent to the assessee on 20.07.2016. The record shows that neither any power of attorney has been issued in favour of the said counsel nor did he represent the assessee before the AO or the CIT(A). In the absence of any appropriate representation on behalf of the assessee, it can safely be presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly, the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-1: NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6482/Del/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) M/s. Rajan Suri (HUF), vs. ACIT, Circle 32 (1), M 12, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi. New Delhi 110 014. (PAN : AAJHR1971G) (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri F.R. Meena, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 29.08.2016 Date of Order : 21.09.2016 ORDER present appeal has been filed by assessee assailing correctness of order dated 12.10.2015 of CIT(A)-18, New Delhi pertaining to 2011-12 assessment year on various grounds. 2. However, No one was present on behalf of assessee at time of hearing, appeal was passed over. record shows that notice has been sent to assessee on 20.07.2016. petition on behalf of some counsel is placed on record by Registry. record shows that neither any power of attorney has been issued in favour of said counsel nor did he represent assessee before AO or CIT(A). In absence of any appropriate representation on behalf of assessee, it can safely be presumed that assessee is not serious in pursuing appeal filed. Accordingly, only alternative left is to dismiss appeal of assessee in limine. 2 ITA No.6482/Del/2015 Support is drawn from order of Tribunals in Commissioner of Income- Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P). It may be further noted that till date of passing of this order, no representation or Power of Attorney in favour of counsel had been filed despite fact that dismissed in limine on ground was pronounced on date of hearing itself in open Court. 3. Before parting it is appropriate to add that in case assessee is able to show that there was reasonable cause for non-representation on date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so advised to pray for recall of this order. 4. In result, appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on this 21st day of September, 2016. Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER TS Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-18, New Delhi. 5. DR, ITAT. ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. M/s. Rajan Suri (HUF) v. ACIT, Circle 32 (1), New Delhi
Report Error