SMT. RITABEN YOGESHBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(3), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 871/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 March 2019AY 2009-102 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 interested in prosecuting the appeal due to non-appearance. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2009-10. The assessee did not appear for the hearing despite proper notice.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

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 ‘D’

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

Hearing: 07/03/2019Pronounced: 11/03/2019

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद �यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘D’

BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 871/Ahd/2017 �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Smt.Ritaben Yogeshbhai Shah ITO, Ward-7(3) Prop: Rushabh Chemicals Vs Ahmedabad. C-402, Sukun 4, Parishram Tower Ankur Road, Narangpura Ahmedabad. PAN : AEXPG 9121 K अपीलाथ�/ (Appellant) �� यथ�/ (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Aoitya Shukla, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 07/03/2019 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 11/03/2019 O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against order of the ld.CIT(A)-10, Ahmedabad dated 29.11.2016 passed for the Asstt.Year 2009-10 challenging levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee by regd. AD post. The same was served as the AD slip has been returned by the postal authority and placed on record. Assessee has not filed any adjournment application nor intimated about reasons for her non-appearance on the date of hearing. In view of this, it is presumed that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal before the Tribunal, therefore, appeal of the assessee stand dismissed for

ITA No.871 /Ahd/2017 - 2 -

want of prosecution following decision of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Delhi).

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the Open Court on 11th March, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →