Induru Mahidhar Kumar Reddy, Nellore, Nellore V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nellore

ITA 1149/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6001 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 14-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VASUNDHARA SINHA

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1149/HYD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 INDURU MAHIDHAR KUMAR REDDY, NELLORE. PAN AACP1834C VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), NELLORE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SMT. VASUNDHARA SINHA DATE OF HEARING : 14-03-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14-03-2016 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER DATED 27/04/2012 OF LD. CIT(A), GUNTUR, FOR THE AY 2009- 10. 2. ON PERUSAL OF RECORD, WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL W AS ADJOURNED ON NUMBER OF OCCASIONS FROM 16/04/2015 TO 25/02/2016 D UE TO SOME OR THE OTHER REASON PARTICULARLY, AT THE REQUEST OF TH E ASSESSEE. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON THE LAST OCCAS ION I.E. ON 14/03/2016, FOR WHICH NOTICE WAS ISSUED THROUGH LD. DR AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR THERE W AS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS A PPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION AS HELD BY H ONBLE HIGH COURT OF 2 ITA NO. 1149 /HYD/2012 INDURU MAHIDHAR KUMAR REDDY, NELLORE MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF IND IA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING T HE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 IT R 480), WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO SEEK RE CALL OF THIS ORDER BY WAY OF FILING AN M.A., SHOWING SUFFICIENT REASONS, WHIC H PREVENTED HIM FOR ABSENCE ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH MARCH, 2016. SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER AC COUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 14 TH MARCH, 2016 KV COPY TO:- 1) INDURU MAHIDHAR KUMAR REDDY, C/O R.V. SESHAIAH NAIDU, M.COM., BL, DTL, SRI K. BHEEMA RAO, B.COM, ADVOCAE & TAX CON SULTANTS, NO. 14-250, KAPU STREET, NELLORE 524 001 HYDERABAD 2) ITO, WARD 1, NELLORE 3) CIT(A), GUNTUR 4) CIT, GUNTUR 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., H YDERABAD.