M/S PRABHAT AUTOMOBILES, JAWAHAR AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, VIJAYAWADA
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution as there was no representation for the appellant on the day of hearing. No costs were awarded.
What were the facts?
The appellant, M/s. Prabhat Automobiles, filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the Income Tax Tribunal. The appeal was listed for hearing on multiple occasions.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the appellant's failure to appear and prosecute the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A V RAVINDRA BABU INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No. 74 of 2006 Appeal under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam dated 13/04/2005 passed in I.T.A. No. 226A//2000 for the Assessment Year 1996-97 preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Vijayawada dated 16/03/2000 passed in ITA No.8/V/1999-2000 for the Assessment year 1996-97 preferred against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Vijayawada dated 22/03/1999 passed in GIR No.P-340 for the Assessment Year 1996-97. Between: M/s. Prabhat Automobiles, Jawahar Autonagar, Vijayawada, Rep. by its Managing Partner. ...Appellant AND D.C.I.T., Circle-2, Vijayawada. ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: Sri A.V. Krishna Kaundinya Counsel for the Respondent: The Court made the following: JUDGMENT
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.RAVINDRA BABU INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No.74 OF 2006 JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) On 20.10.2023, there was no representation for the appellant. 2. The matter is in the weekly cause list. Today also, there is no representation for the 3. appellant. 4. The Income Tax Tribunal Appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. SD/- S.V.S.R. MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SE N OFFICER To 1. The Chairman, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 4. One CC to Sri A.V. Krishna Kaundinya, Advocate, High Court of AP, Amaravati (OPUC) 5. Three CD Copies MSR VNA
HIGH COURT ■ \ DATED:01/12/2023 JUDGMENT ’>Ci ITTA.No.74 of 2006 - T-' 3 0 MAR 2024 i’r> ~^DP IQ5 ^/<3/<9^y DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS
More judgments on Section 260(A)
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026