MR MADAN MOHAN MANDAL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-42/43, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1143/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 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, considering the assessee's non-cooperative attitude and failure to prosecute the appeal, treated the appeal as unadmitted and dismissed it for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but the assessee or their representative failed to appear on each occasion. Despite repeated opportunities and notices sent via registered post, the assessee remained non-compliant.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee repeatedly fails to appear for hearings despite adequate notice.

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, KOLKATA BENCH (A

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, AM & Shri A.T. Varkey, JM]

order

: June 07, 2018 ORDER

Per P.M. Jagtap, AM

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 13, Kolkata dated 30.11.2015.

2.

The appeal filed by the assessee in this case was initially fixed for hearing on 31.10.2017. The bench however did not function on the said date as well as on subsequent dates i.e. 22.11.2017 and 26.12.2017 when the appeal was fixed for hearing. The hearing thereafter was fixed on 13.02.2018. None however appeared on behalf of the assessee on the said date and hearing, therefore, was adjourned to 19.04.2018 with the direction to the registry to send the notice of the said hearing to the assessee by RPAD at the address given in the appeal memo. On 19.04.2018, none again appeared on 2 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mr. Madan Mohan Mandal behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. In order to give one more opportunity as the final opportunity to the assessee, the hearing was adjourned to 07.06.2018 with the direction to the registry to send the notice of the said hearing to the assessee by RPAD at the address given in the appeal memo. On 07.06.2018 i.e. today, none however has appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment has been filed. It appears from this non-compliant and non-cooperative attitude of the assessee that he is not seriously interested in prosecuting this appeal filed before the Tribunal.

3.

The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum – “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Halkar vs C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, we treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non-prosecution.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non prosecution. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 7th June, 2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →