HIGHVIEW MARKFAB PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 13(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1335/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 September 2018AY 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 noted the assessee's lack of appearance and inferred a lack of serious interest in pursuing the appeal. Relying on Supreme Court and ITAT precedents, the appeal was dismissed for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was scheduled for hearing. Neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor did they file for an adjournment. This was also the case before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-appearance of the assessee. The importance of effectively pursuing an appeal.

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, AM & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]

Hearing: 10.09.2018Pronounced: 10.09.2018

This appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-5, Kolkata dated 24.03.2017 for AY 2012-13.

2.

At the time of hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application seeking adjournment. We also note that before the lower authorities also the assessee was unattended. 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.

Highview Markfab 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, appeal of assessee is dismissed.

Order is pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (P. M. Jagtap) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Dated : 10th September, 2018 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to:

1.

Appellant – Highview Markfab Pvt. Ltd., Bangeshwar Apartment, 89/2, Salkia School Road, Salkia, Howrah, WB-711106 2 Respondent – ITO, Ward-13(2), Kolkata

3.

CIT(A)-5, 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 →