Cyprian D souza, Pune V. DCIT, Pune

ITA 1163/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 116324514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-10-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1163/PN/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 SHRI CYPRIAN N. DSOUZA A 53, VRINDAVAN HOUSING SOCIETY, PASHAN, PUNE 8 PAN AAAPD6636R APPELLANT VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 21.10.2013 DATE OF ORDER : 21.10.2013 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V (IN SHORT CIT-V) P UNE DATED 27- 03-2012 FOR A.Y. 2007-08. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE HEARING WAS FIXED ON 19-08-201 3 FOR WHICH A NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD ON 25-06-2013. HOWEVER, THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 21-10-2013 AT THE REQUEST OF ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 16-08-2013. ON 2 1-10-2013 WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, NEITHER THE AS SESSEE ATTENDED NOR THERE WAS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THES E CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN H ELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHATTACHA RGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING O F 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, A S HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHE MIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE COURTS AND ALSO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEES FOR WA NT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF I.E. ON 21 ST OCTOBER 2013. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 21 ST OCTOBER 2013 GCVSR COPY TO:- 1) ASSESSEE 2) DEPARTMENT 3) THE CIT-V, PUNE 4) THE DR, B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE. 5) GUARD FILE //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, I.T.A.T., PUNE