SRI.JOSEPH ABRAHAM,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ITO, WD-2, KOTTAYAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 553/COCH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 March 2019AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. However, the assessee was granted liberty to file a Miscellaneous Application to explain their absence, which could lead to the appeal being recalled.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing before the ITAT. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, nor did they file an adjournment petition. The ITAT noted that the assessee did not appear despite prior intimation.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed in limine when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing without any valid reason or intimation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules

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, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12/03/2019Pronounced: 12/03/2019

Per CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the

Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Kottayam dated 01/10/2018 and pertains

to the assessment year 2015-16.

2 At the time of hearing of the appeal, none appeared on behalf of the

assessee though the intimation was given to the assessee. There is not even an

adjournment petition received from the assessee. In the circumstances, it

appears that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal, and no useful

I.T.A. No.533/C/2018

purpose would be served by adjourning the hearing. Considering these facts

and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules, as were

considered in the case of Multiplan India, reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del) and in

view of the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of

Late Tukoji Rao Holkar, reported in 223 ITR 480, we dismiss the appeal in limine.

However, if the assessee is at liberty to give explanation in regard to its non-

appearance before the Tribunal on the date of hearing before the Tribunal by

filing a Miscellaneous Application as per the ITAT Rules and if the Bench is so

satisfied, the appeal of the assessee can be recalled for hearing on merit.

3 In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on this 12th March, 2019.

sd/- sd/- (GEORGE GEORGE K.) (CHANDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Place: Kochi Dated: 12th March, 2019 GJ Copy to: 1. Shri Joseph Abraham, Prakkatt House, Moolavattam, Nattakom, Kottayam-686 026. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kottayam. 3. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), Kottayam. 4. The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Kottayam. 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Cochin Bench, Cochin. 6. Guard File. By Order

(ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) I.T.A.T, COCHIN BENCH

I.T.A. No.533/C/2018

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →