Naman Impex Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs Assessee
- CitationI.T.A No.1845/Kol/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution where neither the appellant nor anyone on its behalf appears at the hearing, and the appeal has been repeatedly adjourned at the instance of the parties, the last adjournment having fixed the matter for the date of disposal, the appeal having been pending since 2013, which in the Tribunal's view indicates the assessee is not interested in prosecuting it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P. K. Bansal, AM & Shri Mahavir Singh, JM]
I.T.A No.1845/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Naman Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-II, (PAN: AACCN5845R) Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent)
Date of hearing: 08.06.2015 Date of pronouncement: 08.06.2015
For the Appellant: N O N E For the Respondent: Shri Ajay Kr. Singh, CIT, DR
ORDER Per Shri Mahavir Singh, JM:
This appeal by assessee is arising out of revision order of CIT, Kolkata-II, vide No. CIT-II/DC(Gq)-2/Kol/263/2012-13/10699-10701 dated 28.03.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO, Wd-4(2), Kolkata u/s. 147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for Assessment Year 2008-09 vide his order dated 28.05.2010.
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 repeatedly adjourned either at the request of assessee or revenue. The last adjournment was given on 23.04.2015 fixing the hearing on 08.06.2015. Today, i.e. on 08.06.2015 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/- Sd/- (P. K. Bansal) (Mahavir Singh) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated : 8th June, 2015
Jd.(Sr.P.S.) 2 ITA No.1845/K/2013 Naman Impex Pvt. Ltd. AY 2008-09
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. APPELLANT - M/s. Naman Impex Pvt. Ltd., 4, N. S. Road, Kolkata-
700001 2 Respondent -CIT-II Kolkata.
3. The CIT(A), Kolkata
4. ITO, Wd-4(2) , 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