M/S GOLD ENTERPRISES,BANGALORE vs. ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1094/BANG/2016Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 February 2019AY 2011-122 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 observed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A) order for AY 2011-12. Despite notices, the assessee neither appeared nor filed an adjournment application, and the hearing notice was returned as 'door locked'.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear or respond to notices.

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, BENGALURU

For Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, ACIT(DR)
Hearing: 04/02/2019Pronounced: 04/02/2019

O R D E R

Per PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM :

1.

The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-I, Bengaluru, dated 29/02/2016 for the assessment year 2011-12.

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor an adjournment application has been filed. On perusal of records, it was found that the notice of hearing sent by registered letter, fixing the case for hearing on 04/02/2019 was returned by the postal authorities with the remarks ‘door locked’. Vakalathnama has been filed on record and on earlier

Page 2 of 2 occasions also, learned AR for assessee sought adjournments. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and accordingly dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution, following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in CIT v. Multiplan India P.Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 and of the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480, for non-prosecution.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →