GAYATRI BHARGAVA,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. C.I.T.-RANGE-52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2465/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 September 2016AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, noting the assessee's lack of interest in prosecuting the case, dismissed the appeal in limine for want of prosecution. This decision was based on precedents from ITAT Delhi and MP High Court.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). Despite multiple notices, the assessee neither appeared nor filed an adjournment petition. The revenue was represented by the learned Sr. DR.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's failure to prosecute their appeal before the tribunal.

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, ‘B’ BENCH

Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), XXXIII, Kolkata dated 30-07-2013 for the assessment year 2008-09.

2.

Inspite of service of notices for the hearing on various dates, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment petition was filed. It appears that the assessee is not interested M.P- Gayatri Bhargava in prosecuting his case. In view of the above, following the decisions of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India (P) Limited reported in 38 ITD 320(Del) and Hon’ble M.P High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT reported in (223 ITR 480(MP), we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine for want of prosecution.

3.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29-09-2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →