THE COMMNR.OF INCOME TAX LDH vs. M/S LAL CHAND TIRATH RAM

PDF · subscribers
ITR/49/1983HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01007040198319 April 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 merits due to the destruction of the case file in a fire incident in 2011 and the failure of the department to reconstruct the record. Furthermore, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant (Revenue) when the case was called twice. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. No specific findings were made on any substantive legal or factual issues of the original assessment.

What were the facts?

The present appeal, ITR-49-1983, was filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana (appellant) against Mr. Lal Chand Tirath Ram (respondent). The case was called twice, but no one appeared on behalf of the appellant. The judgment notes that the file of the case was burnt in a fire incident in 2011, and the department had not taken steps to reconstruct the record. Consequently, the High Court found it impossible to decide the case on merits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal can be decided on merits given the destruction of the case file and the absence of the appellant's counsel? (Question of procedure/fact) Assessee's contentions: No arguments were recorded for the assessee as no one appeared. Revenue's contentions: The revenue (appellant) did not present its case, and no arguments were recorded. The judgment states that it is not possible for the Court to decide the case on merits due to the burnt file and non-appearance.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2024:PHHC:052978-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR-49-1983 Date of decision:- 19.04.2024 Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana ....Appellant vs. Mr. Lal Chand Tirath Ram ...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 April 19, 2024 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2024.04.22 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →