What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the assessee was not serious in pursuing the appeal. Following a precedent, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order of the CIT(A). The case was scheduled for hearing, but no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, nor was an adjournment request filed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee on the date of hearing, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without a decision on merits.

M/S. Shah Patel & Co., Ahmedabad vs ITO | ITAT Ahmedabad 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JM, & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM

For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr. D.R

PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This an appeal filed by the assessee against order of the CIT(A)- XVI, Ahmedabad dated 04.12.2013 for Asstt.Year 2010-11

The case was fixed for hearing on 09.05.2017. When the case was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee and neither any adjournment petition was filed. This shows that the assessee is not serious in pursuing with this appeal, and therefore, by following the decision of ITAT, Delhi Bench, in CIT Vs. Multiplan India

ITA.No.746/Ahd/2014 Assessment year 2010-11 - 2 – Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Delhi), we dismiss this appeal of the assessee in limine.

The assessee may, if so advised, file an application before this Tribunal for restoration of its appeal and hearing on merits by showing reasonable cause for not appearing before the Tribunal on the date of hearing, within limitation provided in the Income-Tax Act. The Bench, if so satisfied, may recall its order and restore the appeal to its original number for hearing on merits.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 11/ 05 /2017 at Ahmedabad. (SHRI RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

M/S. SHAH PATEL & CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AHMEDABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments