The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, in the case Winspir Communication v. ACIT held that the issuance of notice under Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1961 itself does not make the appeal admissible. The appellant filed the appeal against the assessment order passed by the respondent for the AY 2008-09. Though the hearing was fixed for 24th February 2016, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. When the notice of hearing was sent at the address furnished by the assessee in the memo of appeal that has been returned unserved with the post remark “left”. Further, no new address was furnished by the Assessee. All these created an impression that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the present appeal.
The Tribunal, while passing the order, pointed out the wordings of Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 which prescribes the conditions about the admissibility of appeal for hearing in following terms: “19(1) The Tribunal shall notify to the parties specifying the date and place of hearing of the appeal and send a copy of the memorandum of appeal to the respondent either before or with such notice. (2)The issue of the notice referred to in sub-rule (1) shall not by itself be deemed to mean that the appeal has been admitted.”
The ITAT reiterated its version in the case Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.)in which it was held that the issuance of notice under Rule 19 of the ITAT Rules, 1961, itself does not make the appeal admissible. Non-attendance makes the appeal defective and the assessee has to correct the same by giving a proper explanation. In the light of the said order in the case of Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd, Shri S.V. Mehrotra (accountant Member) said that “we hold the appeal to be unadmitted with a liberty to the assessee to move application explaining its non-appearance before the ITAT on the appointed date”.
Read the order here.
[googleapps domain=”drive” dir=”file/d/0B3j3oXdY53gVczZtaFVEb3FVbms/preview” query=”” width=”640″ height=”480″ /]
