Kiran Kumari v. ITO-4(2), Lucknow - 2019-LL-0913-38

Citation	2019-LL-0913-38
Appellant Name	Kiran Kumari
Respondent Name	ITO-4(2), Lucknow
Court	ITAT-Lucknow
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	13/09/2019
Assessment Year	2011-12
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	service of notice • non-appearance • non-prosecution
Bot Summary:	This appeal was taken up for hearing on 13/9/2019, but none has appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite issuance of notice through RPAD, which has been returned unserved by the postal authorities with the remark the addressee is not available, hence returned. The notice was sent to the assessee on the address given in form No.36. Since the assessee did not appear, it appears that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. I hold that the appeal is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Respectfully following the view taken in the cases cited, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution. The assessee may get it revived by showing sufficient cause for non-appearance. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed.

IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT ITA No.12/LKW/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Kiran Kumari v. ITO 4(2) 636/33, Ganga Sagar Hospital Lucknow Takrohi Chinhat Lucknow TAN/PAN:BZAPK8344K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R. Date of hearing: 13 09 2019 Date of pronouncement: 13 09 2019 ORDER This is assessee s appeal against order of ld. CIT(A)-2, Lucknow, dated 23/10/2018 for assessment year 2011-12. 2. This appeal was taken up for hearing on 13/9/2019, but none has appeared on behalf of assessee, despite issuance of notice through RPAD, which has been returned unserved by postal authorities with remark addressee is not available, hence returned. notice was sent to assessee on address given in form No.36. Since assessee did not appear, it appears that assessee is not interested in prosecuting appeal. As such, I hold that appeal is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. In this regard, reliance is placed upon 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) ITA No.12/LKW/2019 Page 2 of 2 3. Respectfully following view taken in cases cited (supra), appeal filed by assessee is dismissed for non- prosecution. assessee may, however, get it revived by showing sufficient cause for non-appearance. 4. In result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed. Order pronounced in open Court on 13/09/2019. Sd/- [A. D. JAIN] VICE PRESIDENT DATED:13/09/2019 JJ:1309 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR By order Assistant Registrar Kiran Kumari v. ITO-4(2), Lucknow

Metadata

Judgment