SRI.RAVEENDRAN GURUNATHAN,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ITO(TDS), KOTTAYAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 507/COCH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 February 2019AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the absence of the assessee and following established precedents, presumed the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for the assessment year 2014-2015. The appeal was called for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. No adjournment application was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee before the Tribunal for the hearing of their appeal.

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

Before: Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K, JM

Hearing: 25.02.2019Pronounced: 25.02.2019

Per George George K., JM

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 24.08.2018. The relevant assessment year is 2014-2015.

2.

When this appeal was called for hearing today, none was present on behalf of the assessee nor any application for adjournment has been filed. The notice of hearing has been issued to the assessee at the given address. It is, therefore, presumed that that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. Hence, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine for non-prosecution, by following the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT [(1997) 223 ITR 480 (MP)] and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in

ITA No.507/Coch/2018. 2 Sri.Raveendran Gurunathan. CIT v. Multiplan India P. Ltd. [(1991) 38 ITD 320]. However, if the assessee so desires, shall be free to move an application to this Tribunal praying for recalling of this order, after explaining reasonable cause for non-appearance before the Tribunal on the date of hearing.

3.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 25th day of February, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) (George George K.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Cochin ; Dated : 25th February, 2019. Devdas*

Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT (TDS) Kochi 4. The CIT(A), Kottayam. 5. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 6. Guard file. BY ORDER,

AR-ITAT- Cochin

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →