What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal, in accordance with the proviso to Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee can move for recall if sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown.

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing after proper notice was served. However, the assessee failed to appear before the tribunal for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance for the hearing. The possibility of recalling the order upon showing sufficient cause.

J.Seethalakshmi, Aruppukottai vs DCIT | ITAT Chennai 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

Hearing: 11.05.2017Pronounced: 11.05.2017

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ �यायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, �याियक सद�य एवं �ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. : 465/Mds/2017 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year :2011-12 Smt. J. Seethalakshmi, The Deputy Commissioner of 51, Pillaimar Street, v. Income Tax, Aruppukottai – 626 101 Corporate Circle 2, Madurai PAN: AJGPS1003E (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by : None ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri N. Madhavan, JCIT सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 11.05.2017 घोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 11.05.2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai dated 15.03.2016. The notice of hearing was issued to the assessee by RPAD and the registry has placed on record the proof of serving the notice of hearing. Inspite of notice by RPAD, no-one appeared for the assessee when the appeal is taken up for hearing. There may be various reasons for the assessee for not appearing before this Tribunal after receiving the notice of hearing. One of the reason presumably, the assessee may not be interested in prosecuting this appeal any further. Whatever may be the reason by keeping in view the proviso to Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution.

However it is made clear it is open to the assessee to move this Tribunal for recall of this order provided there was a sufficient cause on the part of the assessee for not appearing before this Tribunal on 11.05.2017, when the appeal is taken up for hearing.

With the above observation, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11th May, 2017 at Chennai.

J.SEETHALAKSHMI,ARUPPUKOTTAI vs. DCIT, MADURAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments