NIRMAL KUMAR BUDHIA,KOLKATA vs. THE ITO, WD-44(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution, following established legal precedents. The assessee was granted liberty to seek recall of the order if serious about pursuing the appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing twice, but the assessee failed to appear on both occasions. No adjournment application was filed by the assessee. The Tribunal inferred that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for hearings.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide 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.
- CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.2,267 citing38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
- Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT2,040 citing223 ITR 480 · 1997 · HC
- CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another1,656 citing118 ITR 461 · 1997 · SC
- New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT351 citing296 ITR 495 · 2008 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA
Before: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed
आदेश /O R D E R
PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata in appeal No.821/CIT(A)-13/Wd- 44(1)/2014-15/Kol dated 19.02.2016. Assessment was framed by ITO Ward- 44(1), Kolkata u/s 143(3)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 18.10.2012 for assessment year 2010-11.
This appeal was last fixed for hearing on 05.10.2016. When the matter was called on for hearing, there was no response from the side of the assessee. Hence, the hearing was adjourned to next Bench and notice of hearing was issued to the assessee through DR fixing the hearing on 06.12.2016. Today, also, when the matter was called on for hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor any application for adjournment was filed. From the above, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in pursuing its case.
A.Y. 2010-11 Nirmal Kr. Budhia vs. ITO Wd-44(1) Kol. Page 2 3. Considering the facts of the case and keeping in view the provisions of rule 19(2) of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules as were considered in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd., (38 ITD 320)(Del), the assessee’s appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution.
The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) has held as under: "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."
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Arti Deepakkumar Pandit, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, DwarkaRajkot4 Jul 2025Dismissed
Also relies on New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, considering the interest of justice and the assessee's claim of unawareness. However, the Tribunal noted the assessee's lack of due care and attention in pursuing the...
- M/S. Ruby Gems Private Limited, Surat vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), SuratSurat13 Mar 2025Dismissed
Also relies on New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT
The Tribunal held that the reasons provided by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal were general and lacked corroborative evidence, thus not constituting a "sufficient cause" for condonation. Furthermore, the ...
- Sh. Noren Mandal, New Delhi vs DCIT, New DelhiDelhi26 Mar 2021Dismissed
Also relies on New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT
The Tribunal held that the appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution, following various High Court and Supreme Court judgments. The assessee was given liberty to pray for recall of the order if they were s...
- Syndicate Bank, Noida vs Addl. CIT (TDS), GhaziabadDelhi15 May 2019Dismissed
Also relies on New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT
The Tribunal held that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution, following established legal principles and case laws.
- Smt. Atro W/O Lekhraj, New Delhi vs ITO, New DelhiDelhi29 Apr 2019Dismissed
Also relies on New Diwan Oil Mills v. CIT
The Tribunal held that the assessee's absence indicates a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Following established precedents, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
