RIDE MASTER RIMS (P) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. THE ACIT, COMPANY CIRCLE V (4), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2139/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 February 2018AY 2011-122 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 inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeals. Following established precedents, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The appeals were adjourned twice, and on the final hearing date, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee on the date of hearing, leading to the dismissal of the appeals.

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.

Before: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy

Hearing: 18.01.2018Pronounced: 20.02.2018

O R D E R

PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

Both the appeals filed by the same assessee are directed against the common order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Chennai dated 28.04.2017 relevant to the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13.

2.

The appeals of the assessee were initially posted for hearing on 20.11.2017 and despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and at the request of the ld. AR, the hearings of the appeals are adjourned to 18.01.2018. Against the defect memo issued by the Tribunal, vide letter dated 15.11.2017, the AR of the assessee was stated to have filed 3 copies of the grounds of appeal

filed before the CIT(A) and Form No.

35. However, no enclosures were found to have been filed by the AR of the assessee. Moreover, when the appeal was taken up for hearing on 18.01.2018, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment petition has been filed. Hence, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeals.

3.

Therefore, having regard to Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules and following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan (India) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of late Tukojirao Holkar (223 ITR 480), both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed for want of prosecution.

4.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on the 20th February, 2018 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →