RAJESH MALIK, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-14(4), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 210/HYD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 December 2019AY 2007-083 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution, citing the principle that an appeal requires effective pursuit, not just filing. No submissions or evidence were presented on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessees' appeals for AY 2007-08 were dismissed for non-appearance on multiple hearing dates. Despite the appeals being recalled, the assessees failed to appear again and did not pay the imposed cost.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be dismissed due to the assessees' persistent non-appearance and failure to prosecute the case effectively.

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.

Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey
Hearing: 16/12/2019Pronounced: 19/12/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX A PPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 210/Hyd/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Rajesh Malik, Hyderabad. vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward – 14(4), Hyderabad. PAN – ACIPM3844Q Appellant Respondent ITA No. 211/Hyd/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Neeraj Malik, Hyderabad. vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward – 14(4), Hyderabad. PAN – AFKPM 9324 G Appellant Respondent Assessee by: NIL Revenue by: Shri Nilanjan Dey Date of hearing: 16/12/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/12/2019 O R D E R PER P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M.: These are the appeals filed by the respective assessees’ for AY 2007-08 against the order of CIT(A) – 6, Hyderabad, both dated, 15/11/2016.

2.

On perusal of record, we find that these appeals were earlier dismissed for non-appearance of the assessees’ or their authorised representatives on 30/11/2017. Thereafter, the assessees’ filed MAs No. 10 & 11/Hyd/2018 and vide order dated, the appeals were recalled and posted for hearing on 28/06/2018 and the date was announced in the open court in

2 I.T.A. Nos. 210 & 211/Hyd/17 Rajesh Malik & Neeraj Malik, Hyd.

the presence of both the parties. However, none appeared for the assessees’ on 28/06/2018 and for this reason only, the Tribunal had imposed a cost of Rs. 1,000/- in each of the cases to be paid to PM’s Relief fund. Thereafter, the cases came up for hearing but since none appeared for the assessees’, they were adjourned from time to time. A notice for hearing was issued for the date of hearing on 22/04/2019 and was also served on the assessees’. However, the case got adjourned as none appeared for the assessees’. When the appeals came up for hearing today i.e. on 16/12/2019, neither asseessees’ appeared nor have paid the cost of Rs. 1,000/- imposed on them. In view of the same, the appeals of the assessees are to be dismissed for non-prosecution since the Hon’ble MP High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) has held that appeal does not mean only filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively.

2.1 Even on merits also, there are no submissions or evidence filed by the assessees’ to rebut the findings of the AO and CIT(A). In view of the same, assessees’ appeals are dismissed.

3.

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are dismissed. Pronounced in the open court on 19th December, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Hyderabad, dated 19th December, 2019. kv

3 I.T.A. Nos. 210 & 211/Hyd/17 Rajesh Malik & Neeraj Malik, Hyd.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →