TAMILNADU STEEL TUBES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 63/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 July 2017AY 1999-20002 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, noting the repeated adjournments and the absence of the assessee's representative, concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT for assessment year 1999-2000. The assessee's representative repeatedly sought adjournments and ultimately did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of interest in pursuing the matter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143,Section 147

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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Hearing: 05.07.2017

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai dated 13.11.2015 in for the assessment year 1999-2000 passed u/s.250(6) r.w.s.143(3) & 147 of the Act.

2.

On the earlier occasion dated 01.03.2017 the Ld. AR had sought adjournment and the same was granted. On several earlier occasions also the Ld.A.R had sought adjournments. Thereafter on the subsequent date of hearing on 05/07/17 none appeared on

3.

In view of the above, I’m of the considered opinion that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal filed before this Tribunal. Hence, following the decision of the Delhi Bench in the case of CIT v. Multiplan India P. Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 and the judgment of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Tukojirao Holkar (223 ITR 480), I dismiss the appeal in limine. The Registry is hereby directed to dispatch this order to the assessee within a period of 7 days from this day.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on the 05th July, 2017.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →