M/S. TRACTOR SPARES COMPANY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1036/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 January 2019AY 2008-092 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 pursuing the appeal. Relying on judicial precedents, the tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2008-09 was listed for hearing. Neither the assessee nor their representative appeared before the tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-appearance of the appellant. The assessee's lack of interest in pursuing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

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, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM]

Hearing: 22.01.2019Pronounced: 22.01.2019

ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This is an appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-10, Kolkata dated 25.01.2018 for confirming the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act levied by the AO for Assessment Year 2008-09.

2.

At the time of hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application seeking adjournment. Case was fixed for hearing on 22.01.2019 and we note that notice has been served upon the assessee, however, 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 appeals are 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 all the appeals of the assessee for non-appearance.

M/s. Tractor Spares Company AY 2008-09

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 filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order is pronounced in the open court.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →