RAM SANWAR GUPTA,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-47, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2109/KOL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 August 2016AY 2007-20082 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 noted the assessee's lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal. Citing legal principles and previous judgments, the Tribunal treated the appeal as unadmitted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was scheduled for hearing multiple times. Despite notices being sent, neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, and the notice sent by registered post was returned undelivered.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee due to their absence and failure to inform the Tribunal of any address change.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

N/A

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, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXX, Kolkata dated 25.07.2014.

2.

In this case, the appeal filed by the assessee was initially fixed for hearing on 09.06.2016. None, however, appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing fixed on the said date. The hearing, therefore, was adjourned by the Bench to 04.08.2016 with a direction to the Registry to send the notice of the said hearing by Registered Post with A/D.

3.

At the time of hearing fixed today, i.e. 04.08.2016, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment has been filed. Even the notice of the said hearing sent to the assessee by Registered Post with A/D at the address given in the appeal memo has been returned back by the postal authorities ./2014 Assessment year: 2007-2008 Page 2 of 2 undelivered with a remark “not known”. The assessee thus has not bothered to inform his new address in order to facilitate the service of notice of hearing. It appears from this conduct of the assessee that he is not seriously interested in prosecuting this appeal filed before the Tribunal.

4.

The law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well known dictum - “vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subvenient”. Considering the facts and keeping in mind the provisions of Rule 19(2) of the ITAT Rules as was considered in the case of CIT –vs.- Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar –vs.- C.W.T. reported in 223 ITR 480, I treat this appeal as unadmitted and dismiss the same for non- prosecution.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →