Avail 20% discount on updated CA lectures for Dec 21 .Use Code RESULT20 !! Call : 088803-20003

ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

In case of non appearance without application by appellant Rule 19 is applied

LinkedIn


Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
At the time of hearing, none has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee. Also, no adjournment application is on the record. Keeping in view these facts, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. Therefore, considering these facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as were considered by the Tribunal in “CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd”, 38 ITD 320 (Del) and by the Hon’ble M.P.High Court in the case of “Late Tukoji Rao Holkar”, 223 ITR 480 (MP), we treat this appeal as un admitted.

Citation :
Express Earthmovers & Equipments Pvt. Ltd., 2A, Avenue Cassia, Westend Greens, Rajokari, New Delhi. PAN: AAACE9926C (Appellant) Vs. ACIT, Cent. Circle 22, New Delhi. (Respondent)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

AND

SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A.No. 402/Del/2012

Assessment Year: 2008-09

Express Earthmovers &

Equipments Pvt. Ltd.,

2A, Avenue Cassia,

Westend Greens, Rajokari,

New Delhi.

PAN: AAACE9926C

(Appellant)

Vs.

ACIT,

Cent. Circle 22,

New Delhi.

 (Respondent)

Appellant by: None

Respondent by: Shri Rajiv Ranka, Sr. DR

O R D E R

PER A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This is an appeal filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2008-09 against the order of the CIT (A)-III, New Delhi, dated 18.11.2011.

2. At the time of hearing, none has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee. Also, no adjournment application is on the record. Keeping in view these facts, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. Therefore, considering these facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as were considered by the Tribunal in “CIT Vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd”, 38 ITD 320 (Del) and by the Hon’ble M.P.High Court in the case of “Late Tukoji Rao Holkar”, 223 ITR 480 (MP), we treat this appeal as un admitted.

3. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

4. The order pronounced in the open court on 01.08.2012.

                                               Sd/-                                  Sd/-

                                     [K.D. RANJAN]               [A.D. JAIN]

                            ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 01 .08.2012.

Dk

Copy forwarded to: -

1. Appellant

2. Respondent

3. CIT

4. CIT(A)

5. DR, ITAT

Deputy Registrar,

ITAT, Delhi Benches

 

CS Bijoy
on 14 August 2012
Published in Income Tax
Views : 1559
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags