SMT. DAXABEN RAJENDRABHAI PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE- 5, BARODA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2184/AHD/2014Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 July 2019AY 2008-092 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 observed that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the case and inferred a lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2008-09. Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was an adjournment sought.

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)

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, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 25/07/2019Pronounced: 30/07/2019

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 20.10.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Baroda arising out of the order dated 10.12.2010 passed by the ACIT, Circle – 5, Baroda under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2008-09.

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 neither anybody 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 her - 2 - Smt Daxaben Rajendrabhai Patel vs. DCIT A.Y. 2008-09 case. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-vs-B.N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) 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, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However the assessee is at liberty to apply for the 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →