SHRI. MADHUKESH S ANGADI,HUBLI vs. ITO, HUBLI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1387/BANG/2015Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 June 2016AY 2009-102 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 observed that the assessee was not present despite proper notice. Following established precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2009-10. The appeal was called for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee due to their absence during the hearing.

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, BANGALORE BENCH B, BANGALORE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'B', BANGALORE SHRI. ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Assessment Year : 2009-10) Shri. Madhukesh S. Angadi, No.4, Shri. Basavanagar, Old Hubballi – 580 024 .. Appellant PAN : ADUPA0023C v. Income-tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Hubballi .. Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri. S. R. Karuppusami, JCIT Heard on : 02.06.2016 Pronounced on : 10.06.2016 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

This is an appeal filed by assessee directed against an order dt 05.06.2015 of the CIT (A)-I, Bangalore, for the A. Y. 2009-10.

2.

When the appeal was called up for hearing, nobody appeared for assessee. It is seen from records that inspite of the date of hearing being ITA.1387/Bang/2015 Page - 2 mentioned in the notice of hearing, which has been issued and served on the assessee by registered post acknowledgement due, nobody was present on the date of hearing. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its case. I dismiss the appeal following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in CIT v. Multiplan India P.Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 and of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480, as the appeal is infructuous for non-prosecution.

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in open court on 10th June, 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →