RAFIQUE - UL - ISLAM,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. I.T.O. WD-50(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1760/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 July 2016AY 2005-062 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine for want of prosecution, citing several High Court and Supreme Court decisions. These decisions emphasize the need for diligent prosecution of appeals.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2005-06. The assessment was framed under section 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee neither appeared nor filed an adjournment application for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear or prosecute the appeal diligently.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

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, KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA

Before: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

आदेश /O R D E R

PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXXII, Kolkata dated 12.03.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO Ward-50(1), Kolkata u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 30.09.2010 for assessment year 2005-06.

2.

At the time of hearing neither appeared nor filed any adjournment application on behalf of assessee though notice of hearing sent to assessee through RPAD. It appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting Rafique Ul Islam v. ITO Wd-50(1) Kol. Page 2 the appeal. In view of the decisions in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan (I) Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del.), Hon’ble MP High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukjirao Holkar Vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 and Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills Vs. CIT 296 ITR 495 (P & H) and the Hon’ble Suprme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N.Bhattacharjee & another 296 ITR 495 (SC), laying down proposition that a litigant has not only to file an appeal but has to prosecute the same diligently and on failure to so prosecute the appeal can be dismissed for non prosecution, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee in limine for want of prosecution.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →