INTUIT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES P LTD,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-IV, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1665/BANG/2014Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 August 2015AY 2009-103 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 decided that the appeal was unadmitted due to the assessee's non-appearance and failure to prosecute. The appeal was dismissed in limine.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on their behalf. The assessee also failed to rectify defects in the notice served, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. The Tribunal considered whether to dismiss the appeal for non-appearance and failure to take necessary steps.

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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE

For Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT-I(DR)
Hearing: 03.08.2015Pronounced: 07.08.2015

Per N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member

1.

This appeal by the assessee is against the order dated 2.7.2013 of the CIT(Appeals)-IV, Bangalore for the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeal on 3.8.2015, despite Acknowledgement-cum-Notice dated 26.12.14 served on the assessee intimating the date of hearing. It is also observed that the above notice also contained defect notice calling upon the assessee to rectify the same, but it appears the same has not been rectified. Thus, it appears that the assessee is not keen in prosecuting the appeal.

3.

Considering the facts 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), we treat this appeal as unadmitted. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT (223 ITR 480) wherein it has been 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.”

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B. 4.

Bhattacharjee & Another (118 ITR 461 at page 477-478) held that the appeal does not mean, mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same.

5.

Following the ratio of the aforesaid decisions, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine for non-prosecution. However, if the assessee through proper application can satisfy the Tribunal for such non- appearance on the appointed date, the Tribunal, at its discretion, may recall this order.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Pronounced in the open court on this 7th day of August, 2015.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →