SHRI PRAKASH S.VYAS,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(2), BARODA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1969/AHD/2014Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 November 2018AY 1988-893 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal inferred that the assessee was not serious about pursuing the case due to non-appearance. Citing various High Court and ITAT decisions, the Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order related to a penalty under section 271(1)(c) for assessment year 1988-89. Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee, but no one appeared on their behalf.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for hearings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

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, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR&

For Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 12/11/2018

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal has been filed before us by the assessee against the order dated 06.03.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- II, Baroda under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arising out of the order dated 27.03.2012 for the Assessment Year 1988-89.

2.

The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee by Registered Post as per the address given in Column No.10 of Form No. 36. However, at the time of hearing neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application for adjournment was. From this, it is reasonable to infer that the assessee is not

ITA No.1969/Ahd/2014 Prakash S. Vyas vs. ITO Asst.Year –1988-89 - 2 - serious to pursue its case. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-vs-B.N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it. Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar-vs-CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, are inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. However the assessee is at liberty to apply for the recall of the order within the prescribed time after furnishing the suitable reasons for non-appearance. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

3.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 29/11/2018

Sd/- Sd/- ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( Ms. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 29/11/2018 Priti Yadav, Sr.PS

ITA No.1969/Ahd/2014 Prakash S. Vyas vs. ITO Asst.Year –1988-89 - 3 -

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-II, Baroda. 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation…14/11/2018 (Cover case) 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 14/11/2018 3. Other Member… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S …………… 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement… 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S……. 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk………………… 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order………………

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →