RATILAL DAHYALAL PATEL,KALOL vs. ITO, WARD-(4), MEHSANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 901/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 November 2019AY 2013-142 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 presumed the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal due to non-representation. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was scheduled for hearing. The assessee was given a last opportunity to appear but remained unrepresented. No petition for adjournment was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to appear for the hearing, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH

Before: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R

Date of hearing : 26-11-2019 Date of pronouncement : 27-11-2019 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2013-14, arises from order of the CIT(A), Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad dated 02-01-2018, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.

2.

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 26/11/2019. 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 Page No 2 Ratilal Dahyalal Patel vs. ITO presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal 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.).

3.

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.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →