M/S. DHANLAXMI SOLVEX (P) LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TPO)-I, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 169/IND/2019Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 June 2019AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that merely filing an appeal is insufficient; it requires effective persuasion. Since the assessee failed to appear or arrange for representation, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on their behalf. The revenue was represented, and the assessee had been duly notified of the hearing date. The Tribunal noted the assessee's absence and lack of communication.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal due to the assessee's non-appearance and failure to prosecute the case effectively.

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, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Mourya, D.R
Hearing: 24.06.2019Pronounced: 26.06.2019

आदेश / O R D E R

PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This appeal is directed against the order of CIT(A)-I, Indore, dated 26.11.2018 for the assessment years 2014-15. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the matter was called out. Ld. Authorized Representative or his representative was

1.

[ ] [M/s. Dhanlaxmi Solvex P. Ltd., Ahmedabad] not present, when the matter was called out. Shri R.P. Mourya, Ld.

D.R. was present for the revenue.

3.

Registered notice of hearing for 24.06.2019, was sent to the assessee, at the address furnished by the assessee. Today i.e. on 24.06.2019, at the time of the hearing, the assessee was not present. It seems that the assessee is not interested to pursue its appeals, therefore, it cannot be kept pending adjudication for indefinite period. It was the duty of the assessee to make necessary arrangements for effective representation on the appointed date.

Mere filing of appeal is not enough rather it requires effective persuasion also. In view of these facts, we are of the view that the appeals of the assessee are liable for dismissal. Our view is supported by the following judicial pronouncements: i) In the case of CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 and 478) wherein their Lordships have held that:

“The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” ii) In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) while dismissing the reference made

[ ] [M/s. Dhanlaxmi Solvex P. Ltd., Ahmedabad] at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order:

“If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference.” iii) In the case of CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing, nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as unadmitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution.

This order has been pronounced in the open court on 26th June, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →