V.NANTHAGOPAL NAIDU,DINDIGUL vs. ITO, DINDIGUL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1628/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 February 2017AY 2010-112 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 absence of the assessee and the lack of any adjournment request, concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11. The Tribunal had previously directed the assessee to file copies of assessment orders of related parties. However, on the adjourned date, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.

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.

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’ ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Hearing: 13.02.2017

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Madurai dated 23.03.2016 and it pertains to assessment year 2010-11.

2.

In this appeal, at the time of earlier hearing on 07.11.2016, the bench had directed the Ld. AR to file the copies of the assessment order of all other related parties and the hearing was adjourned to 13.02.2017.

However, on 13.02.2017, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor any request for adjournment was received.

3.

In view of the above, we are 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), we dismiss the appeal in limine.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on the 13th February, 2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →