SMT.SHOBHA LAKSHMAN,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(2)(4), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 228/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 November 2018AY 2013-142 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 its case. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The appeal was called for hearing, but nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee. The assessee was duly served with the notice of hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee, leading to its dismissal.

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, BENGALURU BENCH B, BENGALURU

Before: SHRI. A. K. GARODIA & SHRI. LALIET KUMAR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU BENCH 'B', BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year : 2013-14) Smt. Shobha Lakshman, No.A-204, Temple Meadow Apartments, 27th Cross, Kaigarika Layout, Kaveri Nagar, BSK 2nd Stage, Bengaluru 560 070 .. Appellant PAN : ABUPL5146K v. Income-tax Officer, Ward – 7 (2)(4), Bengaluru .. Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT Heard on : 19.11.2018 Pronounced on : 19.11.2018 O R D E R PER LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT (A)- 7, Bengaluru, dt.22.12.2017, for the assessment year 2013-14.

ITA.228/Bang/2018 Page - 2

2.

When the appeal was called up for hearing, nobody appeared for assessee. It is seen from records that inspite of the date of hearing being mentioned in the notice of hearing, which has been issued and served on the assessee by registered post acknowledgement due, nobody was present on the date of hearing. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its case. We dismiss the appeal following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in CIT v. Multiplan India P.Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 and of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480, as the appeal is infructuous for non-prosecution.

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →