JAIN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 178/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 June 2018AY 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 noted that the assessee was not present and had not requested an adjournment. Therefore, it was inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Jain Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The assessee was absent for the hearing, and no adjournment request was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-prosecution and absence during the hearing.

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.

Before: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Hearing: 04.06.2018Pronounced: 04.06.2018

ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of learned CIT(A)-XXV, New Delhi dated 03.11.2014 for the assessment year 2011-12.

2.

None is present on behalf of the assessee. Notice for hearing was sent through registered post at the address given in the appeal papers, which is deemed to be served on the assessee, as not returned back. No any written request for adjournment on behalf of the assessee is also available on record. It, therefore, appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee deserves to be dismissed in limine for want of prosecution in view of the orders of Tribunal in CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and of M.P. High Court in Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP).

3.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed, as indicated above. Order is pronounced in the open court on 4th June, 2018. Sd/- Sd/- (Bhavnesh Saini) (L.P. Sahu) Judicial member Accountant Member Dated: 4th June, 2018 *aks* Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Benches, New Delhi

Date 1. Draft dictated (DNS) 04.06.18 PS 2. Draft placed before author 04.06.18 PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM/AM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM/AM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk PS 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →