BEHANI BROTHERS,MALDA vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), MALDA CIRCLE, MALDA, MALDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1352/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 December 2018AY 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 held that the assessee was not serious in prosecuting the appeal and that an appeal requires effective pursuit, not just filing. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear for the hearing of their appeals before the ITAT, and no adjournment application was filed. This was despite prior notice being issued.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's failure to appear for hearings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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 “SMC” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

Behani Brothers Narayanpur, Malda, Pin. No.732141 [PAN No.AAKFM 0553 C] Income Tax Officer, बनाम / Ward-3(1), Malda V/s. Behan Brothers Circle, Malda Rabindra Avenue, Malda, Pin-732101 [PAN No.AAFFB 3686 E] .. अपीलाथ� /Appellant ��यथ� /Respondent None अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/By Appellant Shri Radheshyam, CIT-DR ��यथ� क� ओर से/By Respondent 31-12-2018 सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 31-12-2018 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R All these two cases pertain to different assessees’ appeals for assessment year 2014-15 challenges correctness of Commissioner of Income Tax Jalpaiguri’s separate orders of even dated 03.05.2018, passed in case No.150- 151/CIT(A)/JAL/2016-17, in proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

Today when the cases were called for hearing nobody had put in appearance in assessee’s behest last time i.e. on 24.09.2018 nor was any application for an adjournment filed by the assessee in spite of issue of notice by RPAD. It appears that the assessee is not serious in prosecuting this appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. For this view, we find support from the following decisions:- "1. In the case of CIT vs B.N.Bhattacharjee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that:

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →