Mega Offer Avail 65% Off in CA IPCC and 50% Off in all CA CS CMA subjects.Coupon- IPCEXAM65 & EXAM50. Call: 088803-20003

CA Final Online Classes
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Non appearance without application for adjournment can make the appeal deserve to be dismissed

LinkedIn


Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called for hearing nor any request for adjournment was filed. Earlier also none appeared on behalf of the assessee on 21.2.2012. In these circumstances, it , therefore, appears that the assessee is not interested in pursuing this appeal. Accordingly, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT [38 ITD 320] (Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT [(1996) 223 ITR 480 (MP)], this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Citation :
M/s Authentic Team Leather Pvt. Ltd. ,E-18,Krishna Park,Gali no.1,Old Mahavir Nagar New Delhi [PAN:AACCA4213C] (Appellant) Vs ITO,Ward-2(2) , New Delhi. (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Smt. Anusha Khurana , DR

 

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: ‘A’ BENCH ,NEW DELHI

 

(BEFORE S/SHRI SHRI U.B.S.BEDI ,JM & A.N.PAHUJA, AM )

 

ITA no. 5673/Del/2011

Asstt. Year:- 2007-08

 

M/s Authentic Team Leather Pvt.

Ltd. ,E-18,Krishna Park,Gali

no.1,Old Mahavir Nagar

New Delhi

[PAN:AACCA4213C]

(Appellant)

 

Vs

 

ITO,Ward-2(2) ,

New Delhi.

 (Respondent)

 

Assessee by: None

Revenue by: Smt. Anusha Khurana , DR

 

Date of Hearing:- 19-06-2012

Date of Pronouncement:- 19-06-2012

 

O R D E R

 

A.N. PAHUJA:

 

This appeal filed on 19.12.2011 by the assessee against an order dated 14-09-2011 of the ld. CIT(A), Delhi-V, raises grounds relating to levy of penalty of `30,126/-u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act,1961[hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’]

 

2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called for hearing nor any request for adjournment was filed. Earlier also none appeared on behalf of the assessee on 21.2.2012. In these circumstances, it , therefore, appears that the assessee is not interested in pursuing this appeal. Accordingly, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT [38 ITD 320] (Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT [(1996) 223 ITR 480 (MP)], this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed, in limine.

 

                                                        Sd/-                      Sd/-

                                                (U.B.S.Bedi)        (A.N. Pahuja)

                                             Judicial Member Accountant Member

 

New Delhi

 

Copy of the order forwarded to:

 

The Assessee/CIT concerned/CIT(A)-V,New Delhi /ITO,Ward-2(2), New Delhi/DR/ Guard file

 

 

By order

Deputy Regist rar of ITAT, New Delhi Bench

 

CS Bijoy
on 28 June 2012
Published in Income Tax
Views : 1821
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags