What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee was duly served with the notice of hearing but failed to appear or seek an adjournment. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A) concerning additions made on account of short-term capital gains for the assessment year 2011-12. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution when the assessee fails to appear before the Tribunal after due notice.

Shri Laljibhai Gandalal Patel… vs ITO | ITAT Ahmedabad 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH – “SMC”, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV

Hearing: 09/10/2017Pronounced: 09/10/2017

आदेश/O R D E R

Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld.CIT(A)-2, Vadodara dated 13.11.2015 passed for the Asstt.Yar 2011-12.

In the appeal, the Assessee has contested addition confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) on account of short term capital gain as set out in the grounds of appeal.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice of hearing was sent through RPAD post which was duly served upon the assessee, as AD slip has been placed on record. No application for adjournment of the case stating reasons for non-appearance in the year has been filed. Therefore, I am of the view that the assessee is not interested to

ITA No.1517/Ahd/2014 2

prosecute its appeal, therefore, it is dismissed in limine for want of prosecution.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Order pronounced in the Court on 9th October, 2017 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER

Ahmedabad; Dated 09/10/2017

SHRI LALJIBHAI GANDALAL PATEL,NADIAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, NADIAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments