Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Gulraj Raitani, Kolkata vs Assessee

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal3 February 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution where the assessee, having been repeatedly adjourned for want of appearance, fails to appear at the hearing, and the appeal has been pending since 2011, so that the assessee's lack of interest in prosecuting it may fairly be inferred.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Mahavir Singh, JM & Shri Shamim Yahya, AM]

I.T.A No.1282/Kol/2011 Assessment Year: 2005-06

Gulraj Raitani Vs. Income-tax Officer, Circle-32, Kolkata (PAN:ADCPR6916P) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Date of hearing: 03.02.2015 Date of pronouncement: 03.02.2015

For the Appellant: N o n e For the Respondent: Shri K. L. Kanak, JCIT आदेश /ORDER Per Shri Mahavir Singh, JM :

This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XIX, Kolkata in Appeal No. 212/CIT(A)-XIX/ACIT,Cir-32,Kol/07-08 dated 29.07.2011. Assessment was framed by ACIT, Circle-32, Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for Assessment Year 2005-06 vide his order dated 31.12.2007.

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 repeatedly adjourned since none appeared on behalf of assessee. This being appeal filed in 2011, it seems that assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal as none is present before us at the time of hearing. Hence, the same 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/- (Shamim Yahya) (Mahavir Singh) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 03rd February, 2015 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. APPELLANT - Shri Gulraj Raitani, 40A&B, Dilkhusa Street, Kolkata-17.

2 Respondent - ITO, Circle-32, Kolkata.

3. The CIT(A), Kolkata

4. CIT Kolkata

5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata

/True Copy, By order,

Asstt. Registrar.

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free