SHREE MOHAN LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 823/JPR/2012Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 October 2017AY 2007-083 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 no one appeared for the assessee despite proper notice and no adjournment was sought. Therefore, it was presumed the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the AO's addition. The assessee's grounds of appeal related to the location of land sold and its tax implications. The assessee's representative had withdrawn their power of attorney.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution when the assessee fails to appear or pursue the matter.

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, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 823/JP/2012

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 823/JP/2012
ITA No. 823/JP/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM.

This Appeal by the Assessee i.e. ITA No. 823/JP/2012 is directed against the

order of Ld. CIT(A)-III, Jaipur dated 03.12.2010 pertaining to Assessment Year

2007-08.

The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

“1. That under the circumstances and takes of the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of the Ld. AO, as the land sold was situated beyond 8 Kms from the municipal limits. Therefore the addition made by the AO is wrong and deserves to be deleted.

2.

That the appellant craves the right to add, delete, amend or abandon any of the grounds of this appeal at the time or before the actual hearing of the case.”

2.

At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. On the

last date of hearing Ld. AR for the assessee had withdrawn his power of attorney.

2 ITA No. 823/JP/2016. Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, Jaipur.

Notice of hearing sent to the assessee on 21.09.2017 by RPAD, no one appeared on

behalf of the assessee. No application seeking adjournment is made by the

assessee.

Therefore, it is presumed that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its appeal.

Respectfully following the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of CIT vs.

Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in

the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP), we dismiss

the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution.

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on Friday, the 27th day of October 2017.

Sd/- Sd/- ( HkkxpUn ½ ( dqy Hkkjr) ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Jaipur Dated:- 27/10/2017. Pooja/ आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू

1.

The Appellant- Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, Jaipur. 2. The Respondent- Income Tax Officer, Ware 7(4), Jaipur. 3. The CIT 4. The CIT (A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. Guard File (ITA No. 823/JP/2012)

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत

3 ITA No. 823/JP/2016. Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, Jaipur.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →