M/s Vishal Udyog (P) Ltd., Ludhiana V. DCIT, Ludhiana

ITA 1010/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 101021514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1010/CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) M/S VISHAL UDYOG (P) LTD., VS. THE D.C.I.T, E-113, PHASE-IV, FOCAL POINT, CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: AAACD6282G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 15.10.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.10.2015 O R D E R PER RANO JAIN, A.M . : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, LUDHIANA DATED 28.5.2012 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARI NG ON 24.7.2014 AND THE SAME WAS ADJOURNED TO 29.10.20 14 AND THEN 5.1.2015 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. ON 5.1.2015 AND 25.6.2015, THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION AND FINALLY, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNE D TO 15.10.2015. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE 2 ASSESSEE. ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. O N 15.10.2015, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT SEEM S THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPE AL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO B E DISMISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACH ARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 47 7 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO :- I) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PR OSECUTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 15 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (RANO JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 15 TH OCTOBER, 2015 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. 3 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH