Case Law Details
Ishwarbhai Madhavlal Patel-HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the present case, the Karta of HUF having expired in the year 2021 itself when this information was first provided and since then revised Form No. 36 in the name of the legal-heirs or representative of the deceased-assessee is not be filed as provided in Rule 26 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, nor anybody coming present to give plausible reason for the ineffectiveness on the part of the assessee, but on the contrary, repeatedly filing the Adjournment application in a mechanical way, it is clear that the assessee is no longer interested in pursuing the appeal and in the absence of any corrective action taken, the appeal stands abated. In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as abated and non-maintainable.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-5 [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)” for short] dated 13.03.2018 passed under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15.
2. In the present case, none has appeared to argue the case on behalf of the assessee right from the inception of appeal on 4th June, 2018 to till date with either adjournments were being sought on behalf of the assessee or nobody came present for the assessee on every occasion when the appeal was listed thereafter. Even today, none has come present for the assessee nor any application seeking adjournment has been filed before me. Therefore, I decided to proceed with the matter and dispose of the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing the ld. DR.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
