M/S MASCOT WOODCRAFTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2835/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 July 2016AY 2009-20103 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 held that the assessee's failure to appear for the hearing and their lack of communication indicated a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was fixed for hearing, but the notice sent to their last known address returned unserved. The assessee also failed to inform the Tribunal of any new address. Additionally, there was a significant delay in filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's failure to appear and communicate, and whether there is a duty to inform the Tribunal of address changes.

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, “C” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM]

Date of Hearing : 18.07.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2016. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 19.02.2013 of CIT(A)- VIII, Kolkata relating to AY 2009-10.

2. The case was fixed for hearing on 18.07.2016. The notice was sent to the assessee for hearing by registered post with AD on 23.06.2016 to the address given by the assessee in column no.10 of Form No.36. But the notice returned unserved with the remark by the postal authorities as “Left”.The assessee has not cared to inform the new address to the Tribunal. Besides the above there is a delay of 224 days in filing the appeal. It means that assessee is not interested to prosecute the appeal. Hence the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. For this view we find support from the following decisions :- “1. In the case of CIT vs B.N.Bhattachrgee and another, reported in 118 ITR 461 [relevant pages 477 & 478] wherein their Lordships have held that : “The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.”

2.

In the case of Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of the assessee in default made following observation in their order : “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.”

3.

In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd.: 38 ITD 320(Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any communication for adjournment was received. There was no communication or information as to why the revenue chose to remain absent on that date. The Tribunal on the basis of inherent powers, treated the appeal filed by the revenue as un admitted in view of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

3. The assessee, if so desired, shall be free to move this Tribunal praying for recalling this order and explaining reasons for non-compliance etc. then this order may be recalled.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. Order pronounced in the Court on 18.07.2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →