2017 (3) TMI 1724 - AT - Income Tax

Dismissed Appeals Due to Lack of Pursuit: Importance of Active Participation in Judicial Process

Smt. Parimala Manickavel, Arunachalam Manickavel Versus DCIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada.

Smt. Parimala Manickavel, Arunachalam Manickavel Versus DCIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada. - TMI Issues:1. Non-appearance of the assessee and repeated adjournment requests.2. Dismissal of appeals for want of prosecution.Analysis:1. The judgment pertains to appeals filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for different assessment years. The first appeal, ITA No. 143/VIZ/2014, was adjourned multiple times due to the non-appearance of the assessee and unjustifiable reasons provided for adjournment requests. Despite the assessee's representative seeking adjournments citing work pressure, the tribunal rejected the adjournment application as not justifiable based on the facts presented.2. Similarly, in the subsequent appeals numbered ITA Nos. 168 to 174/VIZ/2014, the assessee sought adjournment on the same ground as in the previous appeal. The tribunal, considering the consistent non-appearance and lack of interest shown by the assessee in prosecuting the appeals, referred to legal precedents to support the dismissal of appeals for want of prosecution. Citing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts, the tribunal emphasized that an appeal requires active pursuit, not merely filing the appeal memo, and highlighted the inherent power of the Court/Tribunal to dismiss appeals in cases where the assessee shows disinterest.3. Ultimately, based on the foregoing discussions and legal principles, the tribunal dismissed all the appeals of the assessees for want of prosecution. The judgment was pronounced in open court on 21st March 2017, highlighting the importance of active participation and diligent prosecution of appeals in the judicial process.