PRODYUT KUMAR SAHA,MALDA vs. ITO,WARD(2), MALDA, MALDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 745/KOL/2012Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 December 2015AY 2006-072 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 noted the consistent absence of the assessee and concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing multiple times, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was filed in 2012.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's failure to prosecute it. The primary issue is the assessee's non-appearance before the tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 145(3),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 Mahavir Singh, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM]

Hearing: 10.12.2015Pronounced: 10.12.2015

ORDER

Per Shri Mahavir Singh, JM:

1.

This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A), Jalpaiguri vide Appeal No. 289/MLD/CIT(A)/JAL/08-09 dated 09.09.2012. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward-2, Malda u/s. 145(3)/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2006-07 vide his order dated 05.12.2008.

2.

None appeared for and on behalf of assessee at the time of hearing of this appeal. At the outset, it is noticed that this appeal was adjourned earlier on many occasions as none appeared on behalf of assessee or at the behest of the assessee. The last adjournment was given on 26.10.2015 fixing the hearing on 10.12.2015. Today, i.e. on 10.12.2015 also none appeared on behalf of assessee. This being appeal filed in 2012, 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/- Sd/- (Waseem Ahmed) (Mahavir Singh) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Dated : 10th December, 2015 Jd.(Sr.P.S.)

Copy of the order forwarded to:

More judgments on Section 145(3)

All 3,640 judgments and leading authorities on Section 145(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →