Subhash Chand Arora v. ITO, Ward 1(1), Muzaffarnagar
[Citation -2016-LL-0928-43]

Citation 2016-LL-0928-43
Appellant Name Subhash Chand Arora
Respondent Name ITO, Ward 1(1), Muzaffarnagar
Court ITAT-Delhi
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 28/09/2016
Assessment Year 2011-12
Judgment View Judgment
Bot Summary: PAN : ABNPA5895M Appellant by : None Respondent by: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 28.9.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 28.9.2016 ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 16.12.2015 in relation to Assessment Year 2011-12. In these circumstances, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting his appeal. The appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. 118 ITR 461, wherein their Lordships have held: The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480, 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 reference 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. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India Ltd, 38 ITD 320,wherein the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, was fixed for hearing. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1641/Del/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Subhash Chand Arora, Vs. ITO, 155/4, Ansari Road, Ward 1(1), Muzaffarnagar. Muzaffarnagar. PAN : ABNPA5895M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 28.9.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 28.9.2016 ORDER This appeal by assessee is directed against order passed by CIT(A) on 16.12.2015 in relation to Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. When matter was called up for hearing today, no one has appeared on behalf of assessee. assessee has not filed any adjournment application also. notice of hearing sent to assessee has not been ITA No.1641/Del/2016 2 returned unserved. In these circumstances, it appears that assessee is not interested in prosecuting his appeal. appeal filed by assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. Our above view finds support from following decisions:- 1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & anr., 118 ITR 461, wherein their Lordships have held: appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it. 2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), wherein, while dismissing reference made at instance of assessee in default, their Lordships made following observation:- If party, at whose instance reference is made, fails to appear at hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of reference, court is not bound to answer reference. 3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Del.),wherein appeal filed by revenue before Tribunal, was fixed for hearing. But on date of hearing nobody represented revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why revenue chose to remain absent on that date. Tribunal on basis of inherent powers, treated appeal filed by revenue as unadmitted in view of provision of Rule 19 of Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. ITA No.1641/Del/2016 3 3. In result, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution. decision was pronounced in open court on 28th September, 2016. Sd/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 28th September, 2016. dk Copy forwarded to 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Dy. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Subhash Chand Arora v. ITO, Ward 1(1), Muzaffarnagar
Report Error