KOCHI PROPETY DEVELOPERS P. LTD.,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 612/BANG/2015Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 August 2015AY 2006-072 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 observed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting its case. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2006-07. Despite proper notice, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee for the hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee.

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, BANGALORE BENCH C, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI. N. V. VASUDEVAN

For Respondent: Shri. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, JCIT

PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

This appeal is filed by assessee directed against an order of CIT (A)- 4, Bangalore, dt 13.02.2015, for the A. Y. 2006-07.

2.

When the case was called up for hearing, nobody appeared for assessee.

It is seen from records that inspite of the date of hearing being mentioned in the acknowledgement-cum-notice, which was served on the assessee by registered ITA.612/Bang/2015 Page - 2 post acknowledgement due, nobody was present on the date of hearing. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its case. We dismiss the appeals following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in CIT v. Multiplan India P.Ltd., (1991) 38 ITD 320 and of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of late Tukoji Rao Holkar v. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480, as the appeal is infructuous for non-prosecution.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →