ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-58 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1809/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 October 2018AY 2008-093 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 an appeal requires active prosecution, not just filing. Since the assessee failed to appear or seek an adjournment, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee bank filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2008-09. The appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for hearings.

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, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

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

Hearing: 22.10.2018Pronounced: 26.10.2018

ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee bank against the order of CIT(A)-24, Kolkata dated 22.06.2017 for A.Y.2008-09.

2. Though the matter has been fixed before this e-court none appeared for the assessee bank. We note that the appeal has been preferred in the year 2017 and this is the 6th date of hearing. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee bank nor preferred any adjournment application. Therefore we infer that the assessee is not interested in pursuing 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.Bhattachargee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that :

Oriental Bank of Commerce A.Y.2008-09

The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.

2.

In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order : “If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference.”

3.

In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as un admitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

3. The assessee, if so desired, shall be free to move this Tribunal praying for recalling this order and explaining reasons for non-compliance etc. then this order may be recalled for just reason.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 26th October 2018 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr.A.L.Saini) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 26th October 2018 RG(Sr.P.S.)

Oriental Bank of Commerce A.Y.2008-09 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant – Oriental Bank of Commerce, C/o R.Singh & Associates, “Hastings Chambers”, 7C, Kiran Shanker Roy Road, Kolkata 700001. Respondent – A.C.I.T.(TDS), Circle-58, Kolkata 2

3. C.I.T.(A)-24, Kolkata 4. C.I.T. Kolkata. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata 5.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →