DURGAPUR METALIKS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 661/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 September 2017AY 2012-132 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, dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution as the assessee failed to pursue the case. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recall of the order if serious about pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 was listed for hearing. However, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was any adjournment requested.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

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 “B” KOLKATA

Before: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

आदेश /O R D E R PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is for the Assessment Year 2012-13 directed against the order of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata passed u/s263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide his order dated 16.01.2017.

2.

When the matter was called upon for hearing no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor any application for adjournment was filed, there was no response from the side of the assessee though the notice of hearing was issued to the assessee by RPAD at the address furnished by the assessee in column 10 of the memo of appeal in form no.

36.

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.

Durgapur Metaliks Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Kol. Page 2 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: "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."

5.

Similarly, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) returned the reference an answered since the assessee remained absent and there was not any assistance from the assessee.

6.

Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same.

7.

Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited supra, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. Before parting, we add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, then it would be at liberty to pray for a recall of this order by moving an appropriate petition, as per law.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the court at the close of the hearing i.e., 14th September,2017 (Aby. T. Varkey) (Waseem Ahmed) (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Kolkata, *Dkp �दनांकः- 14/09/2017 कोलकाता । आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant- Durgapaur Metaliks Ltd., 8/C Maharshi Devendra Rd. 5th Fl, Kol-007 2. ��यथ�/Respondent-Pr. CIT-1, Kolkata 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT Kolkata 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) Kolkata 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

Sr. Private Secretary, Head of Office/DDO आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता ।

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →