MAA SARWESHWARI CONSTRUCTION,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-2(2), ASANSOL, BURDWAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 208/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 March 2016AY 2008-20092 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not appeared for several adjournments and concluded that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was listed for hearing multiple times. On the scheduled date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's repeated absence during hearings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,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, “SMC” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Mahavir Singh, JM]

Hearing: 11.03.2016Pronounced: 11.03.2016

ORDER

Per Shri Mahavir Singh, JM:

1.

This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A), Asansol vide Appeal No. 372/CIT(A)/asl/Wd 2(2)/Asl/10-11 dated 12.12.2014. Assessment was framed by ITO, Wd-2(2), Asansol u/s. 144/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2008-09 vide his order dated 20.12.2010.

2.

None appeared for and on behalf of assessee at the time of hearing of this appeal. At the outset, it is noticed that this appeal was adjourned earlier on many occasions at the behest of the assessee. The last adjournment was given on 02.02.2016 fixing the hearing on 11.03.2016. Today, i.e. on 11.03.2016 also none appeared on behalf of assessee. This being appeal filed in 2015, 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. Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) Judicial Member

Dated : 11th March, 2016 Jd.(Sr.P.S.)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →