3M ELECTRO AND COMMUNICATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. JCIT PUDUCHERRY RANGE, PUDUCHERRY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2286/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 December 2017AY 2009-102 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 appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. The assessee also failed to rectify defects in the appeal memo, including payment of appeal fees.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the assessee's appeal due to non-appearance and failure to rectify defects, indicating a lack of prosecution.

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 A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy

Hearing: 05.12.2017Pronounced: 27.12.2017

O R D E R

PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - Puducherry, Puducherry, dated 19.06.2017 relevant to the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The appeal of the assessee was posted for hearing on 05.12.2017 by service of notice [RPAD on record]. None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment petition has been filed. Further, the assessee has not rectified the defects notified in the Defect Memo that “Appeal fees to be paid under sub-head “Others”. Hence, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

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), the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. 4. Order pronounced on the 27th December, 2017 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →