SAMCO METALS & ALLOYS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1652/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 February 2018AY 2012-133 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 was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263. The appeal was barred by limitation and the assessee showed gross negligence by not appearing for hearings.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and the appeal being barred by limitation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

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, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Hearing: 20.02.2018

आदेश / O R D E R

Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:-

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai dated 30.01.2017 in C.No.6119(33)/PR CIT-6/2016-17 for the assessment year 2012-13 passed U/s.263 of the Act.

2.

In this appeal, notice for hearing was sent to the assessee by Registered Post with Acknowledgement Card intimating the assessee that the appeal is fixed for hearing on 20.02.2018. However, on 20.02.2018, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor any request for adjournment was received. Moreover on the earlier occasions on 18.11.2017 & 04.12.2017 also the assessee had shown gross negligence by not representing its case before the Tribunal. Further the appeal is barred by limitation by five days and the assessee has not filed condonation petition.

3.

In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal filed before this Tribunal. Hence, following the decision of the Delhi Bench in the case of CIT v. Multiplan India P. Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 and the judgment of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukojirao Holkar (223 ITR 480), we hereby dismiss the appeal in limine. The Registry is directed to dispatch this order to the assessee within a period of 7 days from this day.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 20th February, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →