Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, Naresh Purohit, challenged an order confirming the Assessing Officer's order under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal pertains to AY 2017-18. Despite a fresh notice being issued after a prior non-appearance, the appellant's representative did not appear again.
Held
The tribunal noted that no one appeared for the appellant when the appeal was called out. Furthermore, notices sent to the appellant were returned with the endorsement 'no such person found at the address'.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal can proceed in the absence of the appellant and due to undelivered notices.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI
Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA
PER JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT :
By this appeal, appellant assessee is challenging the order dated 06.05.2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ for short) thereby confirming the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’ for short) under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). The appeal relates to A.Y.2017-18.
None appears for the appellant when the appeal is called out.
The record discloses that on the previous date i.e. on 25.11.2025 also there was no appearance on behalf of the appellant and hence, a fresh notice was directed to be issued to the appellant. The notice was accordingly issued and registered cover has been received back with the endorsement that ‘there is no such person’ found on the address. The notice has been received back twice.
In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22/01/2026.