M/S COSMOS PHARMACLS,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, R-VII, LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 279/CHANDI/2018Status: FixedITAT Chandigarh23 July 2018AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee and the lack of any request for adjournment. It was presumed that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal. The Tribunal also mentioned that the assessee could seek recall of the order if a reasonable cause for non-representation is shown.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2010-11. The appeal was listed for hearing, but neither the assessee nor their representative appeared, nor was any adjournment requested.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee before the Tribunal for the hearing of their appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH

Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR

For Respondent: Smt. Chanderkanta
Hearing: 23/07/2018Pronounced: 23/07/2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.279/Chd/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11

M/s Cosmas Pharmacls Vs. The Addl. CIT 56-C, Udham Singh Nagar, Range-VII, Civil Lines, Ludhiana Ludhiana

PAN No. AACFC5095R

(Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee By : None Revenue By : Smt. Chanderkanta

Date of hearing : 23/07/2018 Date of Pronouncement : 23/07/2018 ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, A.M:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.

CIT(A)-3, Ludhiana dated 26/12/2017 pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11 on various

grounds. However, at the time of hearing, neither the assessee was present nor any

request for adjournment has been placed on record.

2.

The record shows that the appeal was filed by the assessee on 05/03/2018

and it came up for hearing before the Bench today i.e 23/07/2018. At the time of

hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The notice of hearing was sent to

the assessee, but there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. Even no

application seeking adjournment was filed. It can be safely presumed that the assessee

may not be serious in pursuing the appeal filed. Support is from the order of the ITAT

Delhi Benches in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. (1991) 38 ITD 320 and the

decision of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Shri Tukoji Rao

Holkar Vs Wealth Tax Commissioner 223 ITR 480 (MP) etc.

3.

Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in the eventuality the assessee is able

to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of

hearing, it would be at liberty to pray for a recall of this order by making an appropriate

prayer. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing itself.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

Sd/- Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated : 23/07/2018 AG Copy to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) The DR 5.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →