CONCEPT LIFELINE INSURANCE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KHEDA vs. THE DY. CIT, KHEDA CIRCLE, NADIAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1569/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 April 2019AY 2009-101 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 that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting its appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee, but it was returned undelivered with the remark "left". The assessee did not appear nor filed any adjournment application.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for want of prosecution when the assessee fails to appear or respond to notices.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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 – BENCH ‘SMC’

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Meena, Sr.DR
Hearing: 26/04/2019Pronounced: 26/04/2019

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद �यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘SMC’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.1569/Ahd/2017 �नधा�रण वष�/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Vs. DCIT, Kheda Circle Concept Lifeline Insurance Nadiad. Marketing P.Ltd. 10, 1st Floor, Shiv Apartment Nr. Vallabh Nagar Pij Road, Nadiad 387 001 Dist. Kheda.

अपीलाथ�/ (Appellant) �त् यथ�/ (Respondent)

: None Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Meena, Sr.DR Revenue by सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 26/04/2019 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/04/2019 आदेश/O R D E R Assessee is in appeal against order of the ld.CIT(A)-1, Vadodara dated 31.3.2017 passed for the Asstt.Year 2009-10.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee through RPAD post, however, the same was returned by the postal authority with the remark “left”. Assessee has not intimated about change of its address. Assessee has also not filed any adjournment application. In view of this, it is presumed that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeals before the Tribunal, therefore, appeals of the assessee stand dismissed for want of prosecution following decision of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). Order pronounced in the Court on 26th April, 2019.

Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 26/04/2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →