Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The appeal was listed for hearing on multiple occasions. During the hearings, the assessee's representative sought adjournments, citing health reasons and lack of uniform.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the appeal had been listed for hearing on multiple occasions and the defects were not cured. The adjournment application was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution and non-compliance with procedural requirements.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 22.12.2023 for the Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. Shri Sudhindra Nath Nag, ld.AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. Sima Das Biswas, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal has been filed on 20.11.2024. Following defects have been mentioned in respect of the said appeal, which was intimated to the assessee :-
Today, when the matter came up for hearing, Shri Sudhindra Nath Nag, CA appeared and sought adjournment. He has filed the adjournment application stating therein as under :-
Mr. Sudhindra Nath Nag, CA was not in uniform. Thus, the adjournment application is rejected and appeal is disposed off.