KALAWATI DEVI SHAW,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 48(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1502/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 January 2019AY 2014-152 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's non-appearance indicated a lack of serious interest in pursuing the appeal. Relying on judicial precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A). The appeal was scheduled for hearing on multiple occasions. However, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared before the Tribunal on the day of the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-appearance of the assessee. Whether the assessee is pursuing the appeal effectively.

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, “B(SMC

Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]

Hearing: 17.01.2019Pronounced: 17.01.2019

This appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-14, Kolkata dated 20.04.2018 for AY 2014-15.

2.

At the time of hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application seeking adjournment. Case was earlier fixed for hearing on 26.11.2018, and the same was adjourned to 17.01.2019 for non-appearance of the assessee and notice fixing the date of hearing was sent through RPAD. On 17.01.2019, when the matter was taken up for hearing no one represented on behalf of assessee. So, it gives an impression that assessee is not seriously interested in pursuing the appeal before the Tribunal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B. N. Bhattacharjee & Anr. 118 ITR 461 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it and the law does not help a sleeping litigant. Hence, the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed as un-admitted. We, therefore,

Kalawati Devi Shaw, AY:2014-15 relying upon the decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (Pvt.) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del), dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non-appearance.

3.

We, further, make it clear that if the assessee is advised to move appropriate application to recall this order, then it is at liberty to do so for just cause and the Tribunal may decide in accordance to law.

4.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court. Sd/- (Aby. T. Varkey) Judicial Member Dated : 17 January, 2019 Jd. (Sr.P.S.)

Copy of the order forwarded to:

1.

Appellant – Sm. Kalawati Devi Shaw, 12/5, Musalmanpara Lane, Howrah-711101. Respondent – ITO, Ward-48(3), Kolkata. 2 3. CIT(A)-14, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)

4. CIT, Kolkata.

5.

DR, ITAT, Kolkata. (sent through e-mail)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →