BASIL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XXII, KOLKATA

ITSSA 44/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 December 2023AY 2010-112 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 held that the appeal filed by the assessee, Basil International Limited, is dismissed. This decision was based on two primary reasons: firstly, the consistent non-appearance of the assessee and its authorized representative on multiple hearing dates, despite notices being sent through RPAD and email. Secondly, the appeal was found to be time-barred by 25 days, and no petition for condonation of delay was filed on record. The Tribunal concluded that there was a violation of Section 253(3) of the Act, and since the appeal was not filed in time and the assessee did not pursue it, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous. No decision was made on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Basil International Limited, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Kolkata, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 20, Kolkata, dated 29/12/2022, passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appeal was listed for hearing on multiple dates, including 22/11/2023. However, neither the assessee nor its authorized representative appeared on any of these dates. Notices sent via Registered Post A.D. and email were ineffective. The appeal was also found to be time-barred by 25 days, with no condonation petition filed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non-appearance and for being time-barred, as per Section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's contentions: The judgment records no submissions from the assessee as neither the assessee nor its authorized representative appeared before the Tribunal. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue, represented by Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R, implicitly argued for dismissal based on the assessee's non-appearance and the appeal being time-barred, as the Tribunal proceeded to dismiss the appeal on these grounds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 253(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE

Hearing: 22/11/2023Pronounced: 21/12/2023

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The above captioned appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata – 20, dt. 29/12/2022, (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. At the outset, we find that the neither the assessee nor his Authorised Representative has appeared on the date of hearing of its appeal fixed on 25/07/2023, 03/10/2023, 11/10/2023 and today. Notices have been sent through RPAD as well as e-mails but to no effect. The appeal is also time barred by 25 days but no condonation petition has been placed on record. Under these circumstances, we are of the opinion that since there is a violation of Section 253(3) of the Act

2 I.T.(SS).A 44/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Basil International Limited and appeal has not been filed in time the present appeal is dismissed as infructuous.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 21st December, 2023 at Kolkata. (SONJOY SARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 21/12/2023 *SC SrPs आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Assessee

""यथ" / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु" अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, 6. गाड" फाई/ Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →