SHRI ATUL KUMAR GOSWAMI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-5, KANPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 363/LKW/2018Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow23 April 2019AY 2012-132 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 noted that proper notice of hearing was sent to the assessee. Since the assessee was not present and had not sought an adjournment, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A). The appeal was listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was an adjournment application filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the absence of the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254

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 ‘A’, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN & SHRI T. S. KAPOOR

For Respondent: Smt. Alka Singh (D.R.)
Hearing: 23/04/2019Pronounced: 23/04/2019

PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of learned CIT(A)-1, Kanpur dated 05/01/2018 pertaining to assessment year 2012- 2013.

2.

At the threshold we noted that when this appeal was called for hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor adjournment application was filed. We find that proper notice of hearing has already been sent to the assessee. Under these circumstances, in our considered opinion, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. As such we hold that this appeal is liable to be

I.T.A. No.363/Lkw/2018 Assessment Year:2012-13 2

dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard we 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), we dismiss this appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. However, the assessee is at liberty to move application u/s 254 of the Act in case the assessee so desires.

4.

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

(Order pronounced in the open court on 23/04/2019)

Sd/. Sd/. ( A. D. JAIN ) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) Vice President Accountant Member

Dated:23/04/2019 *Singh

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Assistant Registrar

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →