M/S VISHAKA TRADECOM P LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-51(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1650/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 January 2018AY 2006-072 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, following established precedents, held that the appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution due to the assessee's absence and lack of interest in pursuing the case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2006-07 was listed for hearing. There was no response from the assessee's side, and no adjournment application was filed.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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 “D” KOLKATA

Before: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

M/s Vishakha Tradecom V/s. Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd., 14,N.S. Road, Ward-1(4), P-7, 1st Floor, Kolkata-10 Chowringhee Square, [PAN No.AAACV 8363 N] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ� /Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent None अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arindam Bhttacherjee, Addl. CIT-DR ��यथ� क� ओर से/By Respondent 03-01-2018 सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 03-01-2018 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:- This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2006-07 is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals)-1, Kolkata dated 15.06.2016.

2.

Today when the matter was called on for hearing, there was no response from the side of the assessee though Registry sent the notice of hearing through RPAD and no application for adjournments filed from the side of assessee. From the above, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case.

3.

Considering the facts of the case and keeping in view the provisions of rule 19(2) of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules as were considered in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 ITD 320)(Del), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.

4.

The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under:

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →