SRI TARAKESWAR PANDEY,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 48(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1756/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 February 2022AY 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's persistent non-appearance indicated a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Relying on Supreme Court and ITAT precedents, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2012-13. The appeal was listed multiple times, but the assessee failed to appear despite receiving notices.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-appearance of the assessee despite repeated notices and whether the assessee is pursuing the appeal effectively.

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, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri Manish Borad, AM ]

Hearing: 24.02.2022Pronounced: 28.02.2022

ORDER

Per Shri A. T. Varkey, JM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-14, Kolkata dated 31.05.2017 for AY 2012-13.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that this is an appeal filed in 2017 against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 31.05.2017. It is noted that despite the appeal has been listed for thirty-seven times none cared to appear on behalf of the assessee despite several notices. Therefore, there is no point in keeping the appeal pending. We note that even though notices have been served upon the assessee, no one has bothered to represent on behalf of assessee before this Tribunal. So, it gives an impression that assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal before the Tribunal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B. N. Bhattacharjee & Anr. 118 ITR 461 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it and the law does not help a sleeping litigant. Hence, the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed as un-admitted. We, therefore, relying upon the decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (Pvt.) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non-appearance. Liberty is also given to the assessee to move appropriate application for recalling this order

Sri Tarakeswar Pandey AY 2012-13 if assessee has just cause for not appearing/representing before us, which may be considered by the Tribunal on its own merit. 7. In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 28th February, 2022.

Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Borad) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 28th February, 2022 JD(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. 1. Appellant – Shri Tarakeswar Pandey, C/o Rajesh Mohan & Associates, Unit No. 18, 5th floor, Bagati House, 34, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkatea-700 013. 2 Respondent – ITO, Ward-48(2), Kolkata.

3. CIT(A)-14, Kolkata.

4. PCIT , Kolkata 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata. (sent through e-mal)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →