WESTINGHOUSE SAXBY FARMER LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2022/KOL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 March 2016AY 2005-20062 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was barred by limitation and lacked sufficient grounds for condonation of delay. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a significant delay of over 5 years. Despite previous adjournments, the assessee failed to appear for the hearing and did not provide cogent reasons for the delay.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal due to a substantial delay in filing and the absence of valid reasons for condonation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA

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

आदेश /O R D E R

PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-

1.

This appeal by the assessee is against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Kolkata No.CIT,Kol-I/263/WHFL/2009-10/1618-1619 u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 05.08.2009 for assessment year 2005-06.

2.

At the time of hearing neither anybody appeared on behalf of assessee nor any adjournment application filed by assessee. Hence, we heard Ld. DR, Shri Niraj Kumar and proceeded with this case. A.Y. 2005-06 Westinghouse Saxby Farmer Ltd. v. CIT-I, Kol. Page 2 3. At the very outset, it was observed that appeal by the assessee is barred by limitation by 5 years, 2 months and 8 days. Earlier the case was fixed for hearing on 14.12.2015 but adjournment petition was filed by the assessee. The adjournment for the hearing was granted with a direction that no further adjournment will be granted in future. However, on 18.01.2016, Ld. AR further submitted adjournment on account of sudden death of close relative and expressed his inability to attend hearing. Finally, it is further adjourned today (01.03.2016) but none appeared on behalf of assessee. Besides the above, we find that no cogent reasons have been given for the condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Hence, we dismiss this appeal in limini as not maintainable. Accordingly, this is dismissed as not maintainable

5.

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed in limini. Order pronounced in the open court 01/03/2016 Sd/- sd/- (N.V.Vasudevan) (Waseem Ahmed) (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Kolkata, *Dkp �दनांकः- 01/03/2016 कोलकाता । आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant-Westinghouse Saxby Farmer Ltd., 17, Convent Road, Kolkata-14 2. ��यथ�/Respondent-CIT-I, Kolkata 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT Kolkata 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) Kolkata 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, / True Copy/

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता ।

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →