Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi

Trust Bawa Goverdhan Dass Ji, New Delhi vs Assessee on 28 January, 2016

        IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
              DELHI BENCH : H : NEW DELHI

    BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                                  AND
  SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                         ITA No.5714/Del/2013
                         Assessment Year : NA

Trust Bawa Goverdhan Dass Ji,     Vs.            DIT(E),
C/o Mr. K.S. Kohli, FCA,                         New Delhi.
WZ-908-B, FF (CB AREA)
Near CB-1, Ring Road,
Naraina,
New Delhi.
PAN : AACTT2292D

     (Appellant)                            (Respondent)

          Appellant by : None
          Respondent by: Shri Rajiv Ranka, Sr.DR

          Date of Hearing      : 28.01.2016
          Date of Pronouncement: 28.01.2016

                                 ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Director of Income-tax (Exemptions), New Delhi, u/s 12AA (1) (b) r.w.s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on 29.8.2013.

2. When the matter was called up for hearing today, no one has appeared on behalf of the assessee. The assessee has not filed any adjournment application also. The notice of hearing sent to the assessee has not been returned unserved. Earlier, on 27.02.2015, also when the matter was fixed for hearing, the assessee was not represented nor any adjournment application was moved. In these circumstances, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. The appeal filed by the assessee is, therefore, liable to be dismissed, for non-prosecution. Our above view finds support from the following decisions:-

1. CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & anr., 118 ITR 461, wherein their Lordships have held:

"The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it."

2. Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.), 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."

3. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Del.),wherein the appeal filed by the revenue before the ITA No.5714/Del/2013 3 Tribunal, was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as unadmitted in view of the provision of Rule 19 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

3. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution.

The decision was pronounced in the open court on 28th January, 2016.

            Sd/-                                          Sd/-
 (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA)                             (R.S. SYAL)
    JUDICIAL MEMBER                            ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: 28th January, 2016.

dk

Copy forwarded to

1.   Appellant
2.   Respondent
3.   CIT
4.   CIT(A)
5.   DR
                                           Dy. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi