M/S J.P. CONSTRUCTION,AGRA vs. DCIT-1, AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 203/AGR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 February 2018AY 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 held that the assessee appeared to be not interested in prosecuting the appeal as no one appeared on their behalf and no adjournment was sought. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing before the ITAT Agra. The assessee's counsel had noted the date of hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's absence during the hearing.

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, AGRA (SMC

Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN

For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR
Hearing: 19.02.2018Pronounced: 19.02.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA

BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A No. 203/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012-13)

J.P. Construction, 83 Defence Vs..DCIT, 1, Agra. Estate, Phase 1, Bundu Katra, Agra. PAN No.AAGFJ8127R (Assessee) (Revenue)

Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR.

Date of Hearing 19.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement 19.02.2018

ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.

CIT(A) dated 30.03.2016, in relation to the assessment year 2012-13.

2.

When the appeal was called out for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the

assessee, nor any application for adjournment has been filed. I find that the date of

hearing has been noted by the Counsel of the assessee. Under these circumstances,

it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal any further.

As such, I hold that the appeal is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. In this

regard I place reliance upon the following case laws: 1. CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del)

I.T.A No. 203/Agra/2016 2

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, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/02/2018.

Sd/- (A.D. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 19/02/2018 *AKV* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →