SHRI DILIP MANGALDAS SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, MEHSANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2132/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 November 2017AY 2011-123 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 the absence of the assessee and any reasonable cause for non-representation, presumed the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeals. The appeals were dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the ITAT for the hearing of their appeals for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2011-12, despite proper notice. No representation or request for adjournment was filed.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of representation at the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144,Section 147

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, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

These two assessee’s appeals for A.Y. 2008-09 & 2011-12, arise from order of the CIT(A)-7, Ahmedabad dated 13-03-2015, in proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.

I.T.A Nos. 2131 & 3132/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2011-12 Page No 2 Shri Dilip Mangaldas Shah vs. ITO

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee. Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee on 11/10/2017 fixing the date of hearing on 13/11/2017 at the address indicated in column No. 10. Despite this, the assessee remained unrepresented. In the aforementioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in the absence of any representation on behalf of the assessee or petition seeking time, it can be safely presumed that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Accordingly the only alternative left is to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine. Support is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holka vs. CWT: 223 ITR480 (M.P.).

3.

Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in case 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 if so advised to pray for a recall of this order.

4.

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13-11-2017

Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 13/11/2017

I.T.A Nos. 2131 & 3132/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2011-12 Page No 3 Shri Dilip Mangaldas Shah vs. ITO

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →