M/s. PRIMCO P. LTD., MUMBAI V. ACIT CENT. CIR. -45, MUMBAI

ITA 1050/MUM/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4195 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 08-07-2013
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2007
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C TRIPURA SUNDARI

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.MITTAL,(JM) AND RAJENDRA (AM) . . , , ./I.T.A. NO.818/MUM/2004 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02) M/S PRIMCO PVT.LTD., 601, 6 TH FLOOR, PLOT NO.53, VITTHAL NAGAR CO-OP.HSG, N.S.ROAD NO.2, JVPD SCHEME, VILE PARLE (W), MUMBAI-400049. / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 8( 2 )( 4 ), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI-400020. ./I.T.A. NOS.1050 TO 1054/MUM/2007 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR:1998-1999 TO 2002-03) M/S PRIMCO PVT.LTD., 601, 6 TH FLOOR, PLOT NO.53, VITTHAL NAGAR CO-OP.HSG, N.S.ROAD NO.2, JVPD SCHEME, VILE PARLE (W), MUMBAI-400049. / VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 45, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI-400020. ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AAACP4211B ( ' / APPELLANT) .. ( ( ' / RESPONDENT) ' / APPELLANT BY : NONE ( ' * /RESPONDENT BY : MS.C.TRIPURA SUNDARI * - / DATE OF HEARING : 8.7.2013 * - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 8.7.2013 / O R D E R PER BENCH THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS FOR ASSESSMEN T YEARS 1998-1999 TO 2002-03 AGAINST ORDERS DATED 1.10.2003 OF LD CIT(A )V AND 3.01.2007 OF CIT(A)- CENTRAL-III, MUMBAI RESPECTIVELY. SINCE THESE APPEA LS PERTAIN TO SAME ASSESSEE THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.818/MUM/2004 AND I.T.A. NOS.1050 TO 1054/MUM/2007 2 2. THESE APPEALS WERE FIXED FOR HEARING ON 8.7.2013 BUT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE OR ITS REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING NOR T HERE IS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, WE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N.BHAT TARCHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 460, WHEREIN, THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT . WE ARE ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF ITAT DELHI IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P)LTD ., 38 ITD 320(DEL). 3. IN VIEW OF ABOVE AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE PROVIS IONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE L IABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMI SSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JULY, 2013 * 1 2 8 TH JULY, 2013 * SD /- SD/- ( /RAJENDRA ) ( . . /B.R.MITTAL) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 2 DATED 8/07/2013 . . ./ SRL , SR. PS ! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' / THE APPELLANT 2. ( ' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 6 / CIT 5. 7 (9 , - 9 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) - 9 , /ITAT, MUMBAI