M/S JAI BABA INVESTMENT CONSULTANTS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1216/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 June 2018AY 2011-20122 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 dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-appearance, citing the principle that the law does not assist a sleeping litigant. However, the assessee was given liberty to file an application to recall the order for just cause.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared on any of the scheduled dates. This led the Tribunal to believe the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed due to the consistent non-appearance of the assessee or their representative.

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, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA

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

Hearing: 06.06.2018Pronounced: 06.06.2018

ORDER

Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM

1.

1. The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. LD. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata dated 30.03.2016 for AY 2011-12.

2.

At the time of hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application seeking adjournment. On 12.12.2017 none appeared on behalf of the assessee and the hearing was adjourned to 21.02.2018 and notice was issued by RPAD. On 21.02.2018 bench did not function and hearing was fixed for 04.04.2018. On 04.04.2018 also hearing was adjourned at the request of the assessee and the case was fixed for hearing on 06.06.2018. On 06.06.2018, when the matter was taken up for hearing no one represented on behalf of assessee. 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 the appeal of the assessee for non-appearance.

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, appeal of assessee is dismissed.

Order is pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (P. M. Jagtap) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 6th June, 2018 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to:

1.

Appellant – M/s. Jai Baba Investment Consultants (P) Ltd., 12A, N. S. Road, Kolkata-700 001. Respondent – ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata. 2 3. The CIT(A) Kolkata.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →