Prodyut Kr. Mondal, Kolkata V. ITO, WD-26(2), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 1214/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1358 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-09-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAVID Z CHOWNGHTU
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM & SRI M.BALA GANESH, AM ] I.T.A NO. 1214/KOL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-1 0 PRADYUT KR. MONDAL -VS.- I.T.O., WARD-53(2 ), NOW 26(2), KOLKATA [PAN : AOIPM 0043 B] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI DAVID Z. CHOWNGHTU , ADDL. CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 25.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.10.2017 ORDER PER M.BALAGANESH, AM 1. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE O RDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXXIII, KOLKATA [IN SHORT T HE LD CITA] IN APPEAL NO.52/CIT(A)-XXXIII/ITO WARD-53(2), KOL/12-13 DATED 04.04.2014 PASSED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITO, WARD- [IN SHORT THE L D. AO] UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS TH E ACT) DATED 11.02.2013 FOR THE ASST YEAR 2010-11. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING FIRST ON 09. 08.2017 AND WAS ADJOURNED TO 25.09.2017 . WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING ON 25.09.2017, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEA L FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE 2 ITA NO.1214/KOL/2015 PRODYUT KR. MONDAL A.YR.2009-10 2 DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW WE FIN D SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRJEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REF ERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESEN TED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE W AS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE AS UN ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRES, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER BY EXPLAINING WITH PROPER REASONS FOR NO N-COMPLIANCE, THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 04.10.2017. SD/- SD/- [A.T.VARKEY] [ M.BALAGANESH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 04.10.2017 SB, SR. PS 3 ITA NO.1214/KOL/2015 PRODYUT KR. MONDAL A.YR.2009-10 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1.PRODYUT KR. MONDAL, C/O, A. GUHA, ADVOCATE, 106B , BAKUL BAGAN ROAD, KOLKATA- 700025. 2. I.T.O,WARD-26(2), 2, GARIAHAT ROAD (S), ROOM 2/6 , KOLKATA-700068 3.CIT(A)-XXXIII, KOLKATA 4. CIT-KOLKATA 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVA TE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O., ITAT KOLKATA BENCHE S