M/S JANARDAN CEMEMNT CO PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 3,ASANSOL, ASANSOL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1296/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2018AY 2008-092 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 a litigant must not only file an appeal but also prosecute it diligently. Since the assessee failed to appear and prosecute the appeal, it was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2008-09 was listed for hearing. Despite previous opportunities and a clear indication that the next hearing would be the last, the assessee failed to appear. The Tribunal noted that the appeal had previously been dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's failure to appear before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

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 “B” KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godara

None अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/By Appellant Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT-DR ��यथ� क� ओर से/By Respondent 14-05-2018 सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 17-05-2018 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2008-09 arises against the CIT(A)’s Asansol order dated 20.03.2013, in case No.391/CIT(A)/ASL/DCIT/Cir-3/ASL/2010- 11, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’.

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. Case files suggests a the co-ordinate bench’s order dated 27.02.2018 had made it clear to the assessee that the next hearing would be its last opportunity as the appeal had been dismissed on account of non prosecution vide earlier order dated 11.03.2016. The assessee had filed its Miscellaneous Application No.173/Kol/2016. The same stood accepted on M/s Janardan Cement Co Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIt Cir-3 Asl. Page 2 08.09.2017. The assessee has thereafter not put in appearance despite the fact that it has been granted sufficient opportunity to present its case. Above facts suggest that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the instant appeal. We quote hon’ble Delhi Tribunal’s decision(s) in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (I) Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del), New Diwaan Oil Mills vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & another 296 ITR 495 (SC) that a litigant has not only to file an appeal but has to prosecute the same diligently. & conclude that the instant appeal deserve to be dismissed for non-prosecution.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →