Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2016-17. During the hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. It was also noted that the assessee was ex-parte before the CIT(A).
Held
The Bench observed that the assessee did not appear despite the notice from the Tribunal, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the case. Following precedents, the appeal was not admitted and was dismissed. The assessee also failed to file written submissions to controvert the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Non-appearance of the assessee and dismissal of the appeal in limine.
Sections Cited
IT Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC’’ JAIPUR
Before: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAINvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 588/JP/2024
ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A), Delhi-42 dated 27-02-2024 for the assessment year 2016-17 raising the grounds of appeal
as mentioned at Form No. 36. 2.1 During the course of hearing, the Bench noticed that none appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was call out for hearing. From the records, it is also noticed that the assessee was ex-parte before the ld. CIT(A) who has 2. SHRI DILIP KUMR PACHORI VS DCIT, (INTL. TAXATION), JAIPUR confirmed the action of the AO in spite of providing various opportunities to the assessee 2.2 In spite of the notice sent by the Tribunal, the case was not represented on behalf of the assessee when it was called for hearing. From this, it appears that the assessee is not interested to pursue his cases. So in the circumstances, following the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., [1991]
38. ITD 320 and also on the judgement of the Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukhoji Rao Holkar Vs. CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480, the appeal of the assessee is not admitted and is dismissed in limine. 2.4 During the course of hearing, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 2.5 The Bench further on merit heard the ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noticed that the assessee has not filed written submissions / arguments controverting the order the order of the ld. CIT(A). . Hence, in such a situation, the Bench has no other alternative except to confirm the order of the ld. CIT(A). Thus the above mentioned appeal of the assessee is dismissed.