Court
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Brief
From the judgment it is cleared that the assessee is not interested in the prosecution of this appeal. Considering the facts and keeping in view the provisions of Rule 19 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, as were considered in the cases of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Lt. Tukojirao Holkar , 223 ITR 480 (MP,) we dismiss this appeal of the assessee. The assessee, if so advised, shall be free to move an application before this Tribunal praying for recalling of this order and explaining the reasons for non-prosecution and non-compliance etc. and if the bench is so satisfied about the reasons so stated, then this order may be recalled following a due procedure.
Citation
Gurinder Singh Sikka, C-23, Preet Vihar, New Delhi. ARQPS6880H (Appellant) Vs. ACIT, Circle 38(1), New Delhi. (Respondent)
Judgement
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 1572/Del/2012
Assessment Year: 2003-04
Gurinder Singh Sikka,
C-23, Preet Vihar,
New Delhi.
ARQPS6880H
(Appellant)
Vs.
ACIT,
Circle 38(1),
New Delhi.
(Respondent)
Appellant by: None
Respondent by: Sh. Satpal Singh, Sr. DR
O R D E R
PER C.M. GARG, J.M.
This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 12.03.2012 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – XXVIII, New Delhi for the A.Y. 2003-04.
2. The case was filed on 12.04.2012 and fixed for hearing on 07.06.2012 i.e. today. On 07.06.2012, at the time of hearing, neither the assessee nor his authorized representative appeared before us and also there is no request for adjournment on behalf of the assessee before us. Shri Satpal Singh, Sr. DR attended the proceedings for the Revenue and appeared before this Tribunal.
3. From the above, it is evident that the assessee is not interested in the prosecution of this appeal. Considering the facts and keeping in view the provisions of Rule 19 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, as were considered in the cases of CIT vs. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Lt. Tukojirao Holkar , 223 ITR 480 (MP,) we dismiss this appeal of the assessee. The assessee, if so advised, shall be free to move an application before this Tribunal praying for recalling of this order and explaining the reasons for non-prosecution and non-compliance etc. and if the bench is so satisfied about the reasons so stated, then this order may be recalled following a due procedure.
4. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 07.06.2012.
Sd/- Sd/-
(SHAMIM YAHYA) (C.M. GARG)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 07.06.2012
‘GS’
Copy to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT (A)
5. DR, ITAT, New Delhi.
TRUE COPY
By Order
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
|
