RAMYA SHRINIVAS BHAT,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 434/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 April 2016AY 2008-093 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 dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, citing the proviso to Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. However, the assessee can seek recall of the order if there was a sufficient cause for non-appearance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite receiving notice. The Tribunal noted that the assessee might not be interested in pursuing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's absence. The possibility of recalling the dismissal order if sufficient cause is shown.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI

Hearing: 19.04.2016Pronounced: 19.04.2016

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I6, Chennai, dated 27.11.2015 and pertains to assessment year 2008-09. no one appeared for assessee even though the assessee has received the notice by RPAD. The Registry has placed on record the postal acknowledgement as proof of service of notice on the assessee.

3.

There may be various reasons for the assessee for not appearing before this Tribunal when the appeal was taken up for hearing. One of the reasons, presumably, the assessee may not be interested in prosecuting the appeal. Whatever may be the reason, by keeping the proviso to Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, in mind, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. However, it is made clear that it is open to the assessee to move to this Tribunal for recall of this order provided there was sufficient cause on the part of the assessee for non-appearing before this Tribunal on 19.04.2016 when the appeal was taken up for hearing.

4.

With the above observation, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →