SMT. GUNVANTIBEN HASMUKHLAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-5(1), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, in the absence of the assessee and any petition for adjournment, presumed the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeals. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed two appeals before the ITAT for AY 2011-12 concerning penalties under sections 271E and 271D. The assessee remained unrepresented at the hearing despite being granted a last opportunity.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-representation. The primary issue is the procedural consequence of the assessee failing to appear for the hearing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.2,267 citing38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
- Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT2,040 citing223 ITR 480 · 1997 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh
Date of hearing : 03-12-2019 Date of pronouncement : 04-12-2019 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
These two appeals filed by assessee for A.Y. 2011-12, arise from order of the CIT(A)-5, Ahmedabad dated 16-01-2017, in proceedings under section 271E & 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.
At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee. Last opportunity of hearing was given to the assessee fixing the date of hearing on 03/12/2019. Despite this, the assessee remained unrepresented. In the aforementioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeals filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeals of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holka vs. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.).
Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so advised to pray for a recall of this order.
In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 04-12-2019
More judgments on Section 271E
- Shevam Jugalkishor Kothari, Akola vs ITO-Ward 2, AkolaITA 722/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs A.K.Thangamaligai, Manapparai, TrichyITA 2868/CHNY/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Nisa Chits India Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs ITO, Corporate Ward-1, CoimbatoreITA 2868/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Pedapudi Primary Agricultural Co Operative… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, TenaliITA 525/VIZ/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed18 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Pedapudi Primary Agricultural Co Operative… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, TenaliITA 524/VIZ/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed18 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026