SMT. TRIPTI RAJEEV GOEL,BHARUCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, BHARUCH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 308/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 November 2018AY 2010-112 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 presumed that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal due to the absence of representation. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2010-2011 was scheduled for hearing. The assessee's counsel had previously requested an adjournment, and on the current date, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor was any application filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee or their representative on the date of hearing, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, ‘’SURAT’’ BENCH, SURAT

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Hearing: 12/11/2018Pronounced: 13/11/2018

PER AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2010-2011, arises from the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VI, Baroda, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘’the Act’’.

2.

On the last date of hearing i.e on 30/08/2018, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for adjournment. Accordingly case was adjourned and the date of hearing was fixed on 12/11/2018. However, on this date also none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application is filed. In the aforementioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time, it can be A.Y.2010-2011 2 safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed.

Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holka vs. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.).

3.

Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so advised to pray for a recall of this order.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Court on 13/11/2018 at Surat.

- - (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBERSurat; Dated 13/11/2018 Manish आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

2.

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु"त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT(A)

5.

"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण / DR, ITAT, 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →