PITAMBARA HARDWARE & METAL EXPORTS PVT LTD.,JHANSI vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 247/AGR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 November 2017AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since proper notice was sent and the assessee did not appear, it indicated a lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2008-09. When the appeal was called for hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, and no adjournment application was filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing despite proper notice.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, AGRA (SMC

Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN

For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR
Hearing: 23.11.2017Pronounced: 24.11.2017

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA

BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A No. 247/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2008-09)

Pitambra Hardware & Metal Vs..ACIT, Circle-2 Exports Pvt. Ltd. D-9, 10 Gwalior. Harishankar Puram, Jhansi Road, Gwalior. PAN No.AACCP7197A (Assessee) (Revenue)

Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR.

Date of Hearing 23.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement 24.11.2017

ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.

CIT(A) dated 17.03.2016, in relation to the assessment year 2008-09.

2.

When the appeal was called out for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the

assessee, nor any application for adjournment has been filed. I find that proper

notice of hearing has already been sent to the assessee, which has not returned

unserved. Under these circumstances, it appears that the assessee is not interested

in prosecuting the appeal any further. As such, I hold that the appeal is liable to be

I.T.A No. 247/Agra/2016 2

dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard I place reliance upon the following

case laws:

1.

CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 4. CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee And Another 118 ITR 461(SC)

3.

Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited (supra), I dismiss

the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. The assessee may, however,

get it revived by showing sufficient cause for non-appearance.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24/11/2017.

Sd/- (A.D. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 24/11/2017 *AKV* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →