TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Dismissed for Non-Appearance and Fee Non-Payment for 2010-11, Following CIT vs. Multiplan India Precedent.</h1> The ITAT Delhi dismissed the assessee's appeal against the CIT(A) Meerut's order for the assessment year 2010-11. The dismissal was due to the assessee's ... Non-appearance of the appellant's representative - notice sent by registered post has been returned by the Postal Authorities - HELD THAT:- None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issue of notice by RPAD. The notice sent by registered post has been returned by the Postal Authorities with the remarks ‘No person by this name at this address. So, returned for the correct address.’ The defect memo issued to the assessee that Tribunal fee is paid short by ₹ 3,768/- has not been rectified. Thus, dismiss this appeal as not admitted by applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, [1991 (5) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-D] as held as there was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as unadmitted in view of the provision of Rule 19 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. - Decided against assessee. The appeal by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Meerut for the assessment year 2010-11 was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi due to non-appearance and non-payment of Tribunal fee. The appeal was not admitted as per the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd, 38 ITD 320 (Del.).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
