HARSHITA CHHAWCHHARIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 23(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 659/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 March 2019AY 2009-102 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 the consistent non-appearance of the assessee and their authorized representative. Finding no representation, the tribunal concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2009-10. Despite multiple notices and opportunities, the assessee failed to appear before the tribunal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee due to their absence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D”, KOLKATA

Before: SH. P.M.JAGTAP & SH.S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVIvs ITO,

For Respondent: DR JCIT
Hearing: 30.01.2019Pronounced: 27.03.2019

ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 01.02.2018 passed by CIT(A)-19, Kolkata for AY 2009-10 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”). 2. We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. The assessee called absent.

3.

Heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the assessee filed this appeal on 10.04.2018. The Registry, ITAT, Kolkata Benches issued notice dated 30.11.2018 to the assessee intimating the fixation of date of fixation of hearing on 01.01.2019. For non- appearance of the assessee nor her Authorized Representative, the appeal was adjourned to 30.01.2019. Again the Registry, ITAT, Kolkata Benches issued another notice dated 03.01.2019 intimating the date of hearing on 30.01.2019 to the assessee by RPAD but, however, we find no representation on behalf of the assessee. Ld.DR vehemently contended that the appeal should be dismissed as there was no representation on behalf of the assessee inspite of issuance of notices by the Registry. We find force in the arguments of the Ld. DR and as discussed above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.03.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →