SWASTIK URBAN RESOURCES PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 487/CTK/2017Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2018AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was scheduled for hearing, but the notice sent by Speed Post was returned with the remark 'Addressee Left'. The assessee did not provide a new address.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's failure to appear or prosecute the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Hearing: 17/05

1 ITA No .487/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 13- 201 4

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.487/CTK/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-2014

Swastick Urban Resources Vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Pvtg Ltd., 2nd floor, B/23/1, Bhubaneswar Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AAQCS 5831 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Date of Hearing : 17/05/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 17 /05/ 2018

O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the

CIT(A)-1 Bhubaneswar dated 6.9.2017 for the assessment year 2013-

14.

Notice posting the appeal for hearing on 17th May, 2018 was sent to 2.

the assessee by Speed Post at the address given in Form No.36, has

been returned back by the postal authorities with the remarks “Addressee

Left”. The assessee has not furnished any new address to the Tribunal.

Hence, it is not possible to serve the notice of hearing on the assessee.

In view of above, we infer that the assessee is not interested in pursuing

the appeal before the Tribunal which is hereby dismissed for non-

2 ITA No .487/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 13- 201 4

prosecution. While taking this, we derive support from the decision of

Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd.

(1991) 38 ITD 320 (Del).

3.

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

prosecution.

Order pronounced on 17 /05/2018. Sd/- sd/- (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 17/05/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Swastick Urban Resources Pvtg Ltd., 2nd floor, B/23/1, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar. 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward 1(2), Bhubaneswar 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →