SANJHA CHULHA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-52(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1380/KOL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 April 2017AY 2008-20093 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 held that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal due to repeated non-appearances. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was adjourned multiple times at their request. Despite repeated opportunities and clear directions, the assessee failed to appear for the hearing or provide necessary documentation.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to prosecute their appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM ]

Date of Hearing : 07.04.2017. Date of Pronouncement : 07.04.2017. ORDER This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 25.04.2014 of C.I.T.(A)-XXXIII, Kolkata relating to A.Y.2008-09.

2.

This appeal was fixed for hearing on several occasions and was adjourned from time to time at the request of the assessee. On 19.12.2016 the appeal was adjourned to 17.01.2017 giving the last opportunity to the assessee and also the assessee was directed to file revised grounds if the assessee so desires. On 17.01.2017 the AR was directed to produce all the relevant bills with copies and the appeal was adjourned to 02.03.2017. On 02.03.2017 none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore the case was adjourned today i.e. 07.04.2017. Notice of hearing for 07.04.2017 was issued by the registry by RPAD. The same has not been returned unserved. On 07.04.2017 when the case was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee. It means that assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. For this view we find support from the following decisions :- “1. In the case of CIT vs B.N.Bhattachrgee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that : “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.”

2 Sanjha Chulha A.Yr.2008-09 2. In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order : “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.”

3.

In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as un admitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

3. The assessee, if so desired, shall be free to move this Tribunal praying for recalling this order and explaining reasons for non-compliance etc. then this order may be recalled.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07.04.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →