IFB INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 844/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2018AY 2010-112 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 observed that the assessee appeared to be not seriously interested in pursuing the appeal. Relying on Supreme Court and ITAT precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

The assessee, IFB Industries Limited, filed an appeal for AY 2010-11. The assessee neither appeared nor sought adjournment for the hearing before the ITAT. This was the second instance of non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed solely on the grounds of the assessee's non-appearance before the Tribunal.

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 A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM]

Hearing: 22.05.2018Pronounced: 25.05.2018

The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-18, Kolkata dated 27.02.2017 for AY 2010-11.

2.

At the time of hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application seeking adjournment. On 11.04.2018 none appeared on behalf of the assessee and the hearing was adjourned to 22.05.2018 and notice was issued by RPAD. On 22.05.2018, 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.

IFB Industries Limited., AY- 2010-11 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 on 25th May, 2018. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. A. L. Saini) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 25th May, 2018 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: Appellant – M/s. IFB Industries Limted, 14, Taratola Road, Taratola, 1. Kol-700 088. Respondent – ITO, Ward-12(4), Kolkata. 2 The CIT(A), Kolkata 3.

4. CIT , 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata. /True Copy, By order,

Senior Pvt. Secy.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →