LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Rule 19(2) apply in the absence of prosecution

Diganta Paul ,
  24 January 2013       Share Bookmark

Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Brief :
Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules, 1963 and following various decisions of the Tribunal including in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 I.T.R. 480 (MP), we treat the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted and dismiss the same
Citation :
M/s IFC Overseas, B-11, 2nd Floor, Gujaranwala Town, New Delhi-110009. (PAN/GIR No.AAAFI7160H)(Appellant) Vs. ACIT, Circle 20(1), New Delhi. (Respondent)

 

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

(DELHI BENCH `C’: NEW DELHI)

 

BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

 

ITA No.1028/Del./2012

(Assessment Year: 2008-09)

 

M/s IFC Overseas,

B-11, 2nd Floor, Gujaranwala Town,

New Delhi-110009.

(PAN/GIR No.AAAFI7160H)

(Appellant)

 

Vs.

 

ACIT, Circle 20(1),

New Delhi.

 (Respondent)

 

Assessee by: None

Revenue by: Shri Aroop Singh, Sr.DR

 

ORDER

PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M.

 

This appeal of the assessee emanates from the order of the CIT (A)-XXII, New Delhi, dated 9.12.2011, relevant to assessment year 2008-09.

 

2. Despite getting the case adjourned by the Counsel of the assessee on 16.10.2012, nobody attended nor any request for adjournment has been received. So, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecution of the present appeal.

 

3. Having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules, 1963 and following various decisions of the Tribunal including in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 I.T.R. 480 (MP), we treat the appeal of the assessee as un-admitted and dismiss the same

.

4. As a result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution.

 

Order pronounced in open court soon after the conclusion of the hearing on 16.10.2012.

 

Sd/- Sd/-

(J.S. REDDY) (U.B.S. BEDI)

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

 

Dated: Oct. 16, 2012

SKB

 

Copy of the order forwarded to:-

 

1. Appellant

2. Respondent

3. CIT

4. CIT (A)-XXII, New Delhi.

5. CIT (ITAT) Deputy Registrar, ITAT

 
"Loved reading this piece by Diganta Paul?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Taxation
Views : 4412




Comments