BHARAT B.,CHOKHANI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 624/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 August 2017AY 2008-092 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 prosecuting the appeal. Following precedent, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed belatedly without a condonation petition. When the appeal was called for hearing, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was any adjournment request received.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's absence and lack of interest.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, ‘B’ (SMC

Before: SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE]

For Respondent: Shri. B. Sagadevan, IRS, JCIT

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

During the course of hearing, I find that the appeal was earlier posted on 08.06.2017 and at the request of the A.R. for the assessee, the case was adjourned to 22.08.2017 i.e. to-day. The appeal was filed belatedly, no condonotion petition was filed. When the appeal was called up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of assessee nor any ITA No. 624/Mds/2017 :- 2 -: adjournment request was received. Hence, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT v.

Multiplan (India) Ltd. (38 ITD 320) (Del), I dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee, for non-prosecution.

2.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on Tuesday, the 22nd August of 2017, at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →