M/S MANOJ METAL UDYOG,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-35(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2712/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 December 2015AY 2008-20092 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 dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, citing the assessee's lack of interest in pursuing the matter. This decision was made after multiple adjournments.

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 2013.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's failure to prosecute the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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” “A” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Mahavir Singh, JM]

Hearing: 08.12.2015Pronounced: 08.12.2015

For the Appellant: N O N E For the Respondent: Shri Tanuj Niyogi, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XX, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 251/CIT(A)-XX/Ward-35(4)/10-11/Kol dated 09.09.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward-35(4), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2008-09 vide his order dated 31.12.2010.

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 as none appeared on behalf of assessee. The last adjournment was given on 23.11.2015 fixing the hearing on 08.12.2015. Today, i.e. on 08.12.2015 also none appeared on behalf of assessee. This being appeal filed in 2013, 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 : 8th December, 2015 Jd.(Sr.P.S.)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →