M/S.GENISTRA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1252/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 March 2019AY 2012-133 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 assessee's non-compliant and non-cooperative attitude, similar to the proceedings before the CIT(A). Applying the principle that law assists the vigilant, the Tribunal treated the appeal as unadmitted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee also failed to appear for the hearing before the ITAT, despite being given an opportunity.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for hearings and demonstrates a lack of diligence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules

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, KOLKATA BENCH (D

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM]

Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice President

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 7, Kolkata dated 28.03.2018 passed ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution.

2.

In this case, the appeal filed by the assessee was initially fixed for hearing on 05.02.2019. None, however, appeared on behalf of the assessee on the said date. In order to give one more opportunity to the assessee, the hearing was adjourned to 05.02.2019 with the direction to the registry to send the notice of the said hearing to the assessee at the address given in the appeal memo. On 05.03.2019 i.e. today, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any 2 M/s. Genistra Construction Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 application seeking adjournment has been filed. It is observed that there was a similar non-compliance on the part of the assessee even during the course of appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) culminating in the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). Keeping in view this non-compliant and non-cooperative attitude of the assessee, it appears that the assessee is not seriously interested in prosecuting this appeal filed before the Tribunal.

3.

The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 5th March, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →