What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the appeal was marked as defective due to non-compliance with filing requirements. Since the defects were not removed and no representative appeared, the appeal was dismissed.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was listed for hearing. However, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee during the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal due to the assessee's failure to appear and rectify defects in the appeal filing.

M/S Aks Alloys P. Ltd. vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 15-07-2019 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) of the Act on 28-03-2016. 2. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. Upon perusal of order sheet entries, it could be seen that none is appearing

2 - for assessee since past several occasions. Left with no option, we proceed to dispose-off the appeal. 3. The Registry has market the appeal as defective since the original grounds of appeal as well as original Form-36 has not been filed in the prescribed manner as required under the extant Rules. In such eventuality, the appeal could not be admitted and therefore, the same is dismissed for want of removal of defect. The hearing notice issued to the assessee has been returned back with the remarks ‘left’. The new address is not available on record.

4. The appeal stands dismissed as defective.

Order pronounced on 03rd August, 2022.

M/S AKS ALLOYS P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments