M/S. PINCERS MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1349/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 June 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, citing the principle that the law does not help a sleeping litigant, dismissed the appeal for non-appearance. The assessee was granted liberty to file an application to recall the order for just cause.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was an adjournment sought. This led the Tribunal to believe the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.

What were the issues?

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

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(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, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri S. S. Godara, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM]

Hearing: 11.06.2018Pronounced: 20.06.2018

Per Shri M. Balaganesh, AM

1.

This appeal filed by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-1, Kolkata vide appeal No. 907/CIT(A)-1/Wd-2(1)/2015-16 dated 28.12.2016. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for AY 2012-13 vide his order dated 06.03.2015.

2.

At the time of hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application seeking adjournment. 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 this appeal of the assessee for non-appearance.

2 Pincers Marketing 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, the appeal of assessee is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →