9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 484 - AT - Income TaxConditions for admissibility of appeal under Rule 19 of Rules - defects pointed out by the Registry have not been cured by the assessee which needed to be cured - Held that - The record shows that on the last date of hearing adjournment was moved by the assessee and while granting adjournment it was indicated that the defects pointed out by the Registry have not been cured by the assessee which needed to be cured. The date of next hearing has been noted on the adjournment application, despite this fact neither the defects are cured nor there is any representation. In the afore-mentioned peculiar facts and circumstances, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal. Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 Following the decision in CIT vs Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 1991 (5) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-D Appeal dismissed.
Issues:
Admissibility of appeal for hearing based on non-attendance and defects in the appeal memo. Analysis: The appeal was filed by the assessee against the CIT(A)'s order for the 2009-10 assessment year. However, during the hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite multiple opportunities. The ITAT Rules, 1963, specifically Rule 19, outline the conditions for the admissibility of an appeal for hearing. The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to cure defects in the appeal memo and did not provide any representation, indicating a lack of seriousness in pursuing the appeal. The ITAT referred to a previous case, CIT vs Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., where it was established that the mere issuance of a notice under Rule 19 does not automatically make the appeal admissible. Non-attendance and defects in the appeal can render it defective, requiring correction by the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with the rules to ensure a proper hearing of the appeal. Following the precedent set in the Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. case, the ITAT in this judgment held the appeal to be unadmitted due to the assessee's non-attendance and failure to correct defects in the appeal memo. The assessee was granted the liberty to rectify the defects by submitting an appropriate application to ensure a proper hearing. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed in limine, and the order was pronounced in open court on 11th August 2014.
|
