SMT. JAGDEEP M.SHUKLA,VADODARA vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 916/AHD/2016Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 August 2018AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal presumed that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal due to non-representation. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was listed for hearing. However, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite proper notice. The assessee remained unrepresented and did not seek any adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-appearance of the assessee when proper notice has been served. The seriousness of the assessee in pursuing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH

Before: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2008-09, arises from order of the CIT(A)- 5, Vadodara dated 31-12-2015, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant- assessee. Last notice dated 20/02/2018 of hearing was sent to the assessee fixing the date of hearing on 20/08/2018 at the address indicated in column No. 10. Despite this, the assessee remained unrepresented. In the aforementioned

I.T.A No. 916/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 Smt. Jagdeep M. Shukla vs. DCIT

peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holka vs. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.).

3.

Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so advised to pray for a recall of this order.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21-08-2018

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 21/08/2018 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →