GANAPATHY DILIBAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2061/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 November 2017AY 2013-142 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 due to non-appearance and failure to rectify defects. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was posted for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. Additionally, a defect regarding the payment of appeal fees was not rectified.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution when the assessee fails to appear and rectify defects.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of ITAT Rules

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: 09.11.2017Pronounced: 27.11.2017

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) 2, Chennai dated 27.06.2017 relevant to the assessment year 2013-14.

2.

The appeal of the assessee was posted for hearing on 09.11.2017 by service of notice [RPAD on record]. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Moreover, the assessee has not rectified the defect 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 November, 2017 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →