M/S. VINAYAK CORPORATION,ARVALI vs. DCIT, S.K.CIRCLE, HIMATNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 752/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 November 2019AY 2010-112 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal inferred that the assessee was not serious about pursuing the appeal, citing precedents where appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Vinayak Corporation, filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2010-11. The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee, but no one appeared on their behalf, nor was an adjournment requested.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Respondent: Shri L. P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 29/11/2019Pronounced: 29/11/2019

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is against order dated 08.01.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Ahmedabad arising out of the order dated 30.11.2016 passed by the DCIT, S. K. Circle, Himatnagar under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2010-11.

2.

The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee by Registered Post as per the address given in Column No.10 of Form No. 36. However, at the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application for adjournment was filed. From this, it is reasonable to infer that the assessee is not serious to pursue his case. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-vs-B.N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC)

- 2 - M/s. Vinayak Corporation vs DCIT A.Y. 2010-11 observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it. Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar-vs-CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, since it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However the assessee is at liberty to apply for recall of the order within the prescribed time after furnishing the suitable reasons for non-appearance. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →