INDU PRABHAKAR,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 20/CHANDI/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 October 2018AY 2008-093 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 pursuing the appeal and that the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution, citing apex court decisions.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(Appeals). The assessee's appeal was scheduled for hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor was an adjournment requested.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

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.

आदेश/Order PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Amritsar Camp at Chandigarh (in short CIT(Appeals) dated 28.9.2017 passed u/s 250 (6) of the Income Tax At, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’).

2.

The appeal of the assessee was fixed for hearing today i.e. on 25.7.2018. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee n o r a n y a p p l i c a t i o n w a s m o v e d f o r a d j o u r n m e n t . It seems that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal and the instant appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed.

2 ITA No.20/Chd/2018 A.Y.2008-09

3.

In our above view, we get support from the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee 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.” 4. Our view further finds support from the following decisions also :- i) CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) ii) Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar Vs.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. Respectfully following the decisions (supra), we dismiss the instant appeal filed by the assessee for non- prosecution.

6.

Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in the eventuality the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty to pray for a recall of this order by making an appropriate prayer. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing itself.

7.

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

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 25.07.2018.

Sd/- Sd/- संजय गग� अ�नपणा� ग�ता (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG ) �याय�क सद�य/ Judicial Member लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �दनांक /Dated: 22nd October,2018 *रती* आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :

3 ITA No.20/Chd/2018 A.Y.2008-09

1.

अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आय�त / CIT 4. आयकर आय�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानसार / By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →