SHRI NIRANJANKUMAR DWARKAPRASAD AGARWAL, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, RANGE-12(3), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2202/AHD/2014Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 July 2017AY 2009-103 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 inferred that the assessee was not serious about pursuing the appeal. Citing Supreme Court and High Court precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2009-10. Notice of hearing was sent to the assessee, but no one appeared on their behalf, nor was an adjournment requested.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee fails to appear for the hearing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD

For Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 25/07/2017Pronounced: 26/07/2017

आदेश / O R D E R

PER SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

This is an appeal filed by the assessee/appellant against the order of learned CIT(A)-XX, Ahmedabad, dated 30th May, 2014, for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10

2.

The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee by Registered Post as per the address given in Column No.10 of Form No. 36. However, at

ITA No.2202/Ahd/2014 Niranjan D. Agarwal HUF vs. ITO Asst.Year –2009-10 - 2 - the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application for adjournment has been filed. From this, it is reasonable to infer that the assessee is not serious to pursue its case. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and Another, 118 ITR 461(SC) observed that preferring an appeal means effectively pursuing it. Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) dismissed the reference filed by the assessee for not taking necessary steps. Similar view is taken by I.T.A.T., Delhi Bench in the case of Multiplan India Ltd., 38 ITD 320. Considering the above, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution.

3.

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

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 26/07/2017

Sd/- Sd/- ¼iznhi dqekj dsfM;k½ ¼iznhi dqekj dsfM;k½ ¼iznhi dqekj dsfM;k½ ¼iznhi dqekj dsfM;k½ ¼egkohj ¼egkohj ¼egkohj izlkn½ ¼egkohj izlkn½ izlkn½ izlkn½ Yks[kk ln Yks[kk lnL; L; U;kf;d lnL; U;kf;d lnL; Yks[kk ln Yks[kk ln L; L; U;kf;d lnL; U;kf;d lnL; (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 26/07/2017 Priti Yadav, Sr.PS

ITA No.2202/Ahd/2014 Niranjan D. Agarwal HUF vs. ITO Asst.Year –2009-10 - 3 -

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-XX, Ahmedabad. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 5. 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy//

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad True Copy 1. Date of dictation 25/07/2017 (covered case) 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member …25/07/2017 3. Other Member… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S…………….. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement…… 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S…….26/07/2017 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 26/07/2017 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order………………

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →