THE ACIT (ASSTT)A.VIJAYAN,PALAKKAD vs. THE ACIT TDS, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 541/COCH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 January 2019AY 2016-172 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals in limine for non-prosecution due to the assessee's absence. The assessee was granted the liberty to apply for recalling the order with a reasonable cause for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mr. Vijayan, filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order for the assessment year 2016-2017 (2nd, 3rd, and 4th Quarter). No one appeared on behalf of the assessee during the hearing, and no adjournment request was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeals by the assessee due to their absence during the scheduled hearing.

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: 16.01.2019Pronounced: 16.01.2019

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No.539/Coch/2018
ITA No.540/Coch/2018
ITA No.541/Coch/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Chandra Poojari, AM

These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 31.08.2018. The relevant assessment year is 2016-2017 (2nd, 3rd and 4th Quarter).

2.

When these appeals were 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 his appeals. Hence, we dismiss the appeals of

ITA No.539/Coch/2018. 2 Sri.Vijayan 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 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 these orders, after explaining reasonable cause for non-appearance before the Tribunal on the date of hearing.

3.

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on this 16th day of January, 2019.

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

Cochin ; Dated : 16th January, 2019. Devdas*

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

AR-ITAT- Cochin

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →