SMT. SEEMA CHHABRA,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-VI(3), LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1507/CHANDI/2017Status: PendingITAT Chandigarh15 May 2018AY 2009-102 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 an appeal requires effective prosecution, not just filing. Since the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal, it was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A) order. The appeal was adjourned multiple times, and despite proper notice, the assessee failed to appear for the hearing. No application for adjournment was filed.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear for hearings despite receiving proper notice.

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, DIVISION BENCH ‘SMD’, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA

Hearing: 15.05.2018Pronounced: 15.05.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘SMD’, CHANDIGARH

BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1507/Chd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) Seema Chhabra, Vs. The I.T.O., Ludhiana. W-VI(3), Ludhiana. PAN: ACGPC3028C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : None Respondent by : Ms.Deepika Mohan, JCIT DR Date of hearing : 15.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 15.05.2018

ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A..M.:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed

against the order of learned Commissioner of Income

Tax (Appeals)-4, Ludhiana dated 27.11.2016 relating to

assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The appeal of the assessee was fixed for hearing on

19.2.2018 and the same was adjourned to 2.4.2018 and

notice of hearing was sent to the assessee. Again the appeal

of the assessee was adjourned to 15.5.2018 for which date

notice through RPAD was served on the assessee. However,

on the appointed date of hearing i.e. on 15.5.2018, none

appeared on behalf of the assessee n o r a n y a p p l i c a t i o n

w a s m o v e d f o r a d j o u r n m e n t . It seems that the assessee

is not interested in pursuing the appeal and the instant

appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed.

3.

In our above view, we get support from the decision of

the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee

and Another, reported in 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 &

478) wherein their Lordships have held that :

“ The appeal does not mean merely filing of the appeal but effectively pursuing it.” 4. Our view further finds support from the following decisions also :- i) CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del) ii) Estate of late Tukojirao Holkar Vs.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. Respectfully following the decisions (supra), we

dismiss the instant appeal filed by the assessee for non-

prosecution. We may add that the assessee is at liberty to

pray for a recall of the order in case it is serious in

pursuing the appeal.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 15th May, 2018 *Rati* Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. The CIT 5. The DR

Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →