MANEET DEWAN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-VII, LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1010/CHANDI/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 December 2018AY 2015-162 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that an appeal requires effective prosecution, not just filing. Following established precedents, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee was served notice for the hearing date but did not appear. Therefore, the tribunal concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether an appeal could be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee failed to appear for 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, CHANDIGARH

Before: Sh. SANJAY GARG

For Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR
Hearing: 24.12.2018Pronounced: 24.12.2018

आदेश/ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member :

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 14.05.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)].

2.

The record shows that assessee has been served the notice for date of hearing fixed today. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeal. It, therefore, appears that assessee is no more interested in prosecuting the appeal and the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed.

3.

In my above view, I get support from the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee and

ITA-1006/CHD/2018 Page 2 of 2

another, reported in 118 ITR 46l [relevant pages 477 & 478]

wherein their Lordships have held that:

“The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.”

4.

The above view further finds support from the following decisions also:

i) CIT v. Multiplan India (P) Ltd: 38 ITD 320 (Del) ii) Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT: 223 ITR 480(MP)

5.

Respectfully following the decisions [supra], I dismiss

the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court.

Sd/- (संजय गग� ) (SANJAY GARG) �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member

Dated: 21.01.2019 “Poonam” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 3. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File 6.

आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →