SRI SIDDHARTHA NAG,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 786/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 April 2018AY 2011-123 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 the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal and that the law assists those who are vigilant. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT for assessment year 2011-2012. Despite notices being sent, the assessee did not appear for the hearing and made no request for adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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 S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

Hearing: 24/04/2018Pronounced: 24/04/2018

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:

1.

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2011-2012, is directed against the order passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata dated 19.01.2017.

2.

Notice of hearing of this appeal was sent to the assessee at the address given by the assessee in Form No.36. The said notice has not been returned unserved. This appeal was listed for hearing before the Tribunal on 24.04.2018. Today i.e. on 24.04.2018 when the case was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment was made. It means that assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. For this view we find support from the following decisions :-

2 Sri Siddhartha Nag

(1). In the case of CIT vs B.N.Bhattachrgee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that : “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” (2). In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order : “If the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the court is not bound to answer the reference.”

(3). In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as un admitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

3.

We note that in assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was framed by Assessing Officer u/s 144/147 of the Act, due to non-compliances of notices and not furnishing the required details. The Assessing Officer issued notices on 10.12.2014, 16.12.2014, 07.01.2015 & 02.02.2015 but the assessee did not make compliance. On appeal by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) passed ex parte order as none appeared before him during the appellate proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) issued notices for hearings on 01.08.2016, 09.09.2016, 04.10.2016, 29.11.2016 and 26.12.2016 but the assessee did not appear during the appellate proceedings.

3 Sri Siddhartha Nag

4.

The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights; i.e. “vigilantibus non dormientibus, jura subveniunt”.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →