SMT. PAPPI YADAV,LUCKNOW vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE- 6, LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 169/LKW/2019Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 May 2019AY 2006-073 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessee did not appear despite having knowledge of the hearing date, they were not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A) order was listed for hearing. The assessee did not appear on the scheduled date, nor had they filed any adjournment application.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of prosecution.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. A. D. JAIN

For Respondent: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT ITA No.169/LKW/2019 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Smt. Pappi Yadav v. DCIT 417/355, Niwajganj Range 6 Lucknow Lucknow TAN/PAN:AASPY9196M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R. Date of hearing: 21 05 2019 Date of pronouncement: 21 05 2019 O R D E R This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-2, Lucknow dated 17/10/2018 for assessment year 2006-07. 2. This appeal was taken up for hearing on 21/5/2019, but none appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor any application for adjournment has been filed. This appeal was earlier fixed for hearing on 26/4/2019, on which date the ld. A.R. of the assessee had moved an application for adjournment on the pretext that the paper book is required to be filed in this case. Conceding the request of the ld. A.R. of the assessee, the hearing was adjourned to 21/5/2019 and the date of hearing was duly noted by the ld. A.R. of the assessee. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite having knowledge of the date of hearing. Since the assessee did not appear despite having knowledge of the date of hearing, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. As such, I hold that the appeal is liable to be dismissed for

ITA No.169/LKW/2019 Page 2 of 3

non prosecution. In this regard, I place reliance upon the following case laws:- 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008), 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 4. CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC)

3.

Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited (supra), I dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. The assessee may, however, get it revived by showing sufficient cause for non-appearance. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/05/2019.

Sd/- [A. D. JAIN] VICE PRESIDENT

DATED: 21/05/2019 JJ:2105

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →