SHRI SHAIKH ALIMUDDIN,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 3(1), BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 347/IND/2012Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 February 2018AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's conduct demonstrated a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Mere filing of an appeal is insufficient; it requires effective prosecution and representation.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal in 2012. The appeal was listed for hearing on multiple dates, but the assessee failed to appear or provide representation on any of these occasions. The Tribunal noted the assessee's consistent absence despite receiving notices.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's failure to appear for hearings.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, INDORE BENCHE, INDORE

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Mourya
Hearing: 13.02.2018Pronounced: 15.02.2018

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld.

CIT(A)-2, Bhopal, dated 29.12.2010. During the course of hearing

none appeared at assessee’s behalf.

2.

We find that the appeal was filed by the assessee on 11.6.2012. It

is evident from record that the present appeal was fixed for hearing

on so many dates i.e. 14.7.2017, 8.8.2017, 26.9.2017 and

13.2.2018 but on all these dates there was no representation on

behalf of the assessee despite notice. This conduct of the assessee

shows that the assessee is not interested in pursuing his appeal,

therefore, it cannot be kept pending for adjudication for indefinite

period. It was the duty of the assessee to make necessary

arrangements for effective representation on the appointed date.

Mere filing of appeal is not enough, rather it requires effective

persuasion also.

3.

In view of these facts, we are of the view that the appeal of the

assessee is liable for dismissal. Our view is supported by the

following judicial pronouncements:

i) In the case of CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 and 478) wherein their Lordships have held that: “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.”

ii) In the case of Estate of late TukojiraoHolkar v. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order:

“If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference.” iii) In the case of CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing, nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as unadmitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for

non-prosecution.

Order was pronounced in the open court on 15.2.2018.

Sd- sd (KUL BHARAT) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Indore; �दनांक Dated : 15/02/2018 Dn/- Copy to: Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/Guard file. By order Private Secretary/DDO, Indore

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →