M/S. BENGAL EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XVI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 327/KOL/2011Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 February 2017AY 2002-032 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, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules and citing precedent, treated the appeal as un-admitted. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recall of the order if they were serious about pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor were any adjournment applications received. The Tribunal noted the assessee's apparent lack of interest in prosecuting the matter.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee, leading to its dismissal in limine.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA

Before: Shri Aby.T Varke & Shri Waseem Ahmed

आदेश /O R D E R

PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Kolkata dated 29.12.2010. Assessment was framed by DCIT, Central Circle-XVI, Kolkata u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 31.12.2009 for assessment year 2002-03.

2.

The appeal was fixed for hearing on 02.11.2016 27.12.2016 but nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee again the case was adjourned and fixed for hearing today i.e. on 08.02.2017 and nobody attended on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application has been received. It seems that the assessee is not interested to prosecute its matters.

M/s Bengal Emta Coal Mines Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-XVI, Kol. Page 2 3. Considering the facts and the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt.Ltd., 38 ITD 320, we treat the appeal as un-admitted. We further add that in case the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeal filed, so assessee would be at liberty to pray for a recall of this order by moving an appropriate petition, as per law

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →