PRODYUT KR. MONDAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-26(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1048/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 September 2017AY 2008-20092 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 held that an appeal requires active prosecution and not merely filing. Since the assessee failed to appear or pursue the appeal, it was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. No adjournment petition was filed, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal.

What were the issues?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, “A”, BENCH KOLKATA

Hearing: 20/09/2017Pronounced: 20/09/2017

O R D E R

Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:

1.

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2008-2009, is directed against the order passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata dated 28.05.2015.

2.

This appeal came for hearing today i.e. on 20.09.2017 but none was present on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment petition was filed. However, notice was sent by ITAT in past i.e. on 07.08.17, but none was present on behalf of the assessee on the date of hearings. It means that the assessee is not interested to prosecute the 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. 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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →