BETHESDA HOSPITAL SOCIETY,CHHATARPUR vs. I.T.O., CHHATARPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 253/AGR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 October 2017AY 2007-083 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was listed for hearing before the ITAT. Despite proper notice, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor was an adjournment application filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of prosecution.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, AGRA (SMC

Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN

For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad
Hearing: 23.10.2017Pronounced: 23.10.2017

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA

BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A No. 253/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08)

Bethesda Hospital Society, Vs.. Income Tax Officer, Chhatarpur (M.P.). Chhatarpur, (M.P.) PAN No.AAATC 1572 F

(Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR.

Date of Hearing 23.10.2017 Date of Pronouncement 23.10.2017

ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.

CIT(A) dated 17.10.2012, in relation to the Assessment Year 2007-08.

2.

When the appeal was called out for hearing, none appeared on behalf of

the assessee, nor any application for adjournment has been filed. I find that

proper notice of hearing has already been sent to the assessee, which has not

returned unserved. Under these circumstances, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal any further. As such, I hold that the appeal is

I.T.A No. 253/Agra/2016 2

liable to be dismissed for non prosecution. In this regard I place reliance upon the

following case laws:

1.

CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) 2. Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 4. CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee And Another 118 ITR 461(SC)

3.

Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited (supra), I dismiss

the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. The assessee may, however,

get it revived by showing sufficient cause for non-appearance.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23/10/2017.

Sd/- (A.D. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated …./10/2017 Aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

I.T.A No. 253/Agra/2016 3

Date 1. Draft dictated (DNS) 23.10.2017 PS 2. Draft placed before author 23.10.2017 PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM/AM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM/AM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 23.10.2014 PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 24.10.2014 PS 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →