MOUNT DISTILLERIES LTD.,GANGTOK vs. ITO,WARD-2(4), GANGTOK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 191/KOL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 April 2017AY 2010-20113 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 as none appeared on their behalf. The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, citing relevant case law.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11. The appeal was adjourned multiple times at the assessee's request. On the final hearing date, the assessee failed to appear.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's failure to appear and prosecute the appeal.

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, “C” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM]

Date of Hearing : 06.04.2017. Date of Pronouncement : 06.04.2017. ORDER

Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM

1.

This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 31.10.2013 of C.I.T.(A)-Jalpaiguri relating to A.Y.2010-11.

2.

This appeal was listed for hearing on 19.12.2016 and at the request of the assessee’s Authorised Representative the appeal was adjourned to 01.02.2017. On 01.02.2017 the bench did not function and therefore the appeal was adjourned to 06.04.2017. Notice of hearing for hearing on 06.04.2017 was sent to the assessee by RPAD at the address given by the assessee in Form No.36. The notice so sent has not been returned unserved. 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. 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 Court on 06.04.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →