SMT.SAI BEENA K. B LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE & W/O LATE PRADEEP V,PALAKKAD vs. THE DCIT(CENTRAL CIRCLE), TRICHUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 493/COCH/2016Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 February 2018AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. However, the appeal could be recalled if the assessee provides a satisfactory explanation for their absence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite proper notice. The assessee had not intimated any change of address.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed in limine when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing without any intimation or adjournment request.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules

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, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Smt. Sai Beena K.B.,

For Respondent: Shri Shantham Bose, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 06/02/2018Pronounced: 06/02/2018

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated

23/01/2015 of the CIT(A)-IV, Kochi and it is related to the assessment year 2009-10.

2 At the time of hearing of these appeal none appeared on behalf of the

assessee though the notice sent through RPAD. The notice has been sent on the

address given on Form No.36. The assessee has not intimated change of address, if

any, to the Tribunal. There is not even an adjournment petition received from the

assessee. In the circumstances, it appears that the assessee is not interested in 1

ITA No. 493/Coch/2016

pursuing the appeal, and no useful purpose would be served by adjourning the

hearing. Considering these facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of

the ITAT Rules, as were considered in the case of Multiplan India, reported in 38 ITD

320 (Del) and in view of the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case

of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holkar, reported in 223 ITR 480, we dismiss the appeal in

limine. However, if the assessee on a later stage gives explanation in regard to its

non-appearance before the Tribunal on the date of hearing before the Tribunal by

filing a Miscellaneous Application as per the ITAT Rules and if the Bench is so satisfied

the appeal of the assessee can be recalled for hearing on merit.

3 In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court at the time of hearing i.e 6TH February, 2018.

sd/- sd/- ( GEORGE GEORGE.K) (CHANDRA POOJARI) Judicial Member Accountant Member

Cochin: Dated: 6th February, 2018 GJ 1. Smt. Sai Beena K.B., Legal representative of & W/o Late Pradeep V., Ambalaparambil House, Thachangad, Palakkad-678 571. 2. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Thrissur. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-IV,Kochi. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Kochi. 5. DR/ITAT 6. Guard File

By Order

(ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) ITAT COCHIN

ITA No. 493/Coch/2016

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →