RAGINI CREATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 801/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 January 2019AY 2012-132 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 was not seriously interested in pursuing the appeal. Citing the principle that the law does not help a sleeping litigant, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

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

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-appearance of the assessee and if 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, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]

Hearing: 07.01.2019Pronounced: 07.01.2019

ORDER

Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM

1.

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-02, Kolkata dated 03.01.2017 for AY 2012-13.

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 two dates i.e. on 31.07.2018 and 05.11.2018, and the same was adjourned for non-appearance of the assessee and notice fixing the date of hearing was sent through RPAD. On 07.01.2019, 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, 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.

Ragini Creations Pvt. Ltd., AY- 2012-13 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/- Sd/- (P. M. Jagtap) (Aby. T. Varkey) Vice President Judicial Member Dated : 7th January, 2019 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: Appellant – M/s. Ragini Creations Pvt. Ltd., 23A, N. S. Road, 1st floor, 1. Room No. 27A, Kolkata-700 001. . Respondent – ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata 2 3. CIT(A)-2, Kolkata. (sent through e-mail) CIT- , Kolkata. 4.

5.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →