SHRI MAHILA SEWA SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2566/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 March 20192 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, noting the absence of the assessee and the lack of a petition for adjournment, presumed the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeals. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed five appeals for AY 2013-14. The appeals arose from an order under section 200A(1) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee remained unrepresented during the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the assessee's appeals due to non-representation. The tribunal considered whether to dismiss the appeals in limine.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 200A(1)

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 “A” BENCH

Before: Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

These five appeals filed by assessee for A.Y. 2013-14, arise from order of the CIT(A)-8, Ahmedabad dated 04-09-2017, in proceedings under section 200A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee. Opportunity of hearing was given to the assessee fixing the date of hearing on 19/03/2019. Despite this, the assessee remained unrepresented. In the

I.T.A Nos. 2566 to 2570/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Shri Mahila Sewa Sahkari Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT

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 presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeals filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeals 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, all the five appeals of the Assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 25-03-2019

Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 25/03/2019 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 200A(1)

All 129 judgments and leading authorities on Section 200A(1) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →