Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI A.D JAIN & SHRI T.S. KAPOOR
PER: A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT:
This is assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14 against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Bareilly dated 29.06.2017. 2. When this appeal was called out for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor any application for adjournment has been filed. We find that the proper notice of hearing had been sent RPAD to the assessee, which has not returned unserved. Under these circumstances, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal any further. As such, we hold that the appeal is
2 ITA No. 123/Lkw/2018
liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard we place
reliance upon the following case laws:
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)
Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited (supra), we
dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. The
assessee may, however, get it revived by showing sufficient cause for
non-appearance.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 08/03/2019. Sd/- Sd/- (T.S. Kapoor) (A.D. Jain) Accountant Member Vice President
Aks – Dtd. 08 /03/2019 Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order Assistant Registrar