M/s Insilica Semi Conductors India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore V. ITO,

ITA 1117/BANG/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 111721114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R REDDY CITIDR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A NO.1117/BANG/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S. INSILICA SEMICONDUCTORS INDIA PVT. LTD., C/O. RESOLVE BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA (P) LTD., NO.231/236, RAHEJA ARCADE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE 560 095. PAN: AABCC 9522F VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 11(2), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.R. REDDY, CIT-I(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 29.09.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.09.2015 O R D E R PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 7.9.2012 OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-IV, BANGALORE RELATING TO ASSESSME NT YEAR 2007-08. IT(TP)A NO.1117/BANG/2013 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING TODAY NOR ANY APPLICATION FILED. THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT- CUM-NOTICE NOTIFYING THE HEARING DATE HAS BEEN SERV ED ON THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF FILING OF APPEAL. FURTHER, A DEFECT NO TICE DATED 25.5.2015 HAS ALSO BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE (AD CARD PLACED ON RECORD). THE ABOVE CONDUCT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT IT I S NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PR OVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL) WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER: IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFE RENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 4. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARJEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE M EMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. IT(TP)A NO.1117/BANG/2013 PAGE 3 OF 3 5. FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE AFORESAID DECISIONS, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HOWEVER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATION CAN SATISFY THE TRIBUNAL FOR SUCH NON- APPEARANCE ON THE APPOINTED DATE, THE TRIBUNAL, AT ITS DISCRETION, MAY RECALL THIS ORDER. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ) ( N.V. VASU DEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2015. /D S/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENTS 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.