M/S. COIRFOAM INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee was not serious in prosecuting the appeal. Based on precedents, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2011-12 was listed for hearing. Despite notice, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor was an adjournment application filed.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for the hearing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide 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.
- CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.2,267 citing38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
- Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT2,040 citing223 ITR 480 · 1997 · HC
- CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another1,656 citing118 ITR 461 · 1997 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godara
O R D E R
PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:
- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata’s order dated 17.05.2017, in case No.118/CIT(A)-1/C-11(1)/2014-15 in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Today when the case was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee 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: "The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it."
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026