JEEVAN VIHAR PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CC - XXVII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2544/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2016AY 1998-992 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, citing the assessee's absence and lack of interest in pursuing the matter. This decision was made in accordance with a precedent set by the Delhi Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing, but no one appeared on their behalf. The notice for the hearing was returned unserved with the remark "Left", indicating the assessee may have moved without informing the tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing and notices are returned unserved.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, “B” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM]

Hearing: 23.05.2016Pronounced: 23.05.2016

ORDER

Per Shri M. Balaganesh, AM:

1.

This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A), Central-II, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 20/CC-XXVII/CIT(A)C-II/08-09 dated 29.08.2013. Assessment was framed by DCIT, Central Circle-XXVII, Kolkata u/s. 254/143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for AY 1998-99 vide his order dated 12.06.2008.

2.

None appeared for and on behalf of assessee at the time of hearing of this appeal. At the outset, it is noticed that the notice for hearing on 23.05.2016 was sent through Registered with A/D but the same was returned back unserved with the remark “Left”. It is also noticed that the notice was sent at the address provided by the assessee in column 10 of Form No. 36 which is annexed to this file. Information for change of address was also not given by the assessee. Hence, it seems that assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal as none is present before us at the time of hearing. Hence, the appeal of assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution applying the decision of Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320. 3. In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed. 4. Order is pronounced in the open court on 23.05.2016 Sd/- Sd/- (N. V. Vasudevan) (M. Balaganesh) Judicial Member Accountant Member

Dated : 23rd May, 2016 Jd.(Sr.P.S.)

Copy of the order forwarded to:

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →