Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH : KOLKATA
Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM]
Date of Hearing : 03.01.2018. Date of Pronouncement : 03.01.2018. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order 14.01.2016 of C.I.T.(A)-9, Kolkata relating to A.Y.2012-13.
This appeal was listed for hearing on 05.10.2017. Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee at the address given by the assessee in Form No.36 as address for service of notice. On 05.10.2017 the assessee did not appear and again notice was sent by RPAD to the very same address for the hearing of 15.11.2017. The assessee did not appear even on this date. The case was adjourned to 03.01.2018. Notice of hearing was sent by RPAD to the very same address. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called for hearing. The said notice was not returned unserved. 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 :- “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 Abdul Rahim A.Yr.2012-13 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.”
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. The assessee, if so desired, shall be free to move this Tribunal praying for recalling this order and explaining reasons for non-compliance etc. then this order may be recalled.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. Order pronounced in the Court on 03.01.2018.