M/S ASR TRANSPORT CO. (P) LTD. ASR vs. CIT (CENTRAL ) ,LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITR/45/1983HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01007036198322 March 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it was not possible to decide the case on its merits due to the non-appearance of the appellant and the unavailability of the case file, which was destroyed in a fire incident. No steps were taken by the department to reconstruct the record. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. The ratio decidendi is that an appeal cannot be adjudicated on merits if the record is lost and the appellant fails to prosecute the case.

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s ASR Transport Co (P) Ltd., and the respondent, Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana, are parties to Income Tax Reference No. 45 of 1983. The case was called twice, but no one appeared on behalf of the appellant. The judgment notes that the file of this case was burnt in a fire incident in 2011. The concerned department has not taken any steps to reconstruct the record of the said file. Consequently, the Court found it impossible to decide the case on its merits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court can decide the appeal on merits given the non-appearance of the appellant and the destruction of the case file due to a fire incident, with no steps taken for reconstruction by the department. The appellant's side did not present any arguments due to non-appearance. The revenue's side did not present any arguments.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2024:PHHC:042171-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR-45-1983 Date of decision:- 22.03.2024 M/S ASR Transport Co (P) Ltd. Asr

....Appellant vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: None *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) 1. The case called twice but no one has put in appearance on behalf of the appellant. The file of this case has been burnt after the fire incident, which took place in the year 2011. No step has been taken by the concerned department to reconstruct the record of the said file. 2. In these circumstances, it is not possible for this Court to decide the case on merits. 3. Dismissed for non-prosecution. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE 22.03.2024 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2024.04.02 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →