SNIGDHA SAHA,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WD-52(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 177/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 June 2018AY 2011-20123 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 is not interested in pursuing the appeal. Citing various judicial precedents, the Tribunal concluded that an appeal requires active prosecution, not just filing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing on multiple occasions, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notices were sent to the assessee's address, and they were not returned unserved. Today, again, no one appeared for the assessee, nor was an adjournment sought.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for hearings and does not seek adjournment.

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, “B “ BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Sri S.S.Godara, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM]

Snigdha Saha -vs.- I.T.O., Ward-52 (3) Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : BIRPS 8259 K] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 27.06.2018. Date of Pronouncement : 27.06.2018. ORDER

PER S.S.GODARA, JM

1.

This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 24.11.2015 of C.I.T.(A)-7, Kolkata relating to A.Y.2011-12.

2.

This appeal was fixed for hearing on several occasions. None appeared on behalf of the assessee on the said dates and therefore the appeal was adjourned to 27.06.2018 Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee by RPAD to the address mentioned in Form No.36 at col.10. But the notice sent to the assessee had not returned unserved. Today when the case was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor an adjournment petition was moved on behalf of the assessee. It means that assessee is not interested 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.Bhattachargee 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.”

2 Snigdha Saha A.Yr.2011-12 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.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. Order pronounced in the Court on 27.06.2018. Sd/- Sd/- [M.Balaganesh] [ S.S.Godara ] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 27.06.2018. [RG Sr.PS] Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. 1. Snigdha Saha, C/o S.N.Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, “Seben Brothers’Lodge”P.O. Buroshibtala, P.S.Chinsurah, Dist., Hooghly, Pin-712105.

2. I.T.O., Ward-52 (3), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)-7, Kolkata 4. C.I.T.-9, Kolkata. 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →