G. Nagaraj, Bangalore V. ITO, Bangalore

ITA 1227/BANG/2009

• Counselvise Citation: 122721114 RSA 2009
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUSAN THOMAS JOSE

Judgement Text

ITA.1227/BANG/2009 PAGE - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'B', BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI. N. V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.1227/BANG/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) SHRI. G. NAGARAJ, MNO.135, 9 TH CROSS, K. R. LAYOUT, J.P. NAGAR 6 TH PHASE, BANGALORE 560078 .. APPELLANT PAN : AAJPN654B V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -4(3), BANGALORE .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT. SUSAN THOMAS JOSE, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 07.08.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.08.2012 O R D E R PER N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT : THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, SHRI. G. NAGARAJ OF BANGALORE, AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-II, BANG ALORE, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 02. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN POSTED ON VARIOUS OCCASIO NS, AT ONE POINT OF TIME, IT WAS KEPT AS PART-HEARD AND LATER ON IT WAS RELEASE TO BE POSTED IN THE ITA.1227/BANG/2009 PAGE - 2 REGULAR COURSE. EVEN AFTER THAT, THE APPEAL HAS BE EN POSTED ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS. ON 28.06.2012 WHEN IT CAME UP FOR HEARI NG THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT HE WAS WAITING FOR FEW DETAILS FROM THE AO WHICH WERE YET TO BE RECEIVED. HENCE THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 26. 07.2012. HOWEVER, SINCE THERE WAS NO BENCH FUNCTIONING ON 26.07.2012, THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 07.08.2012 BY SENDING A NOTICE OF HEAR ING. PROOF OF HAVING SERVED THE NOTICE IS ALSO AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HOW EVER, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE, NOR WAS THERE ANY PETITION FOR ADJOURNMENT FROM THE ASSESSE E OR THE COUNSEL. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO DI SMISS THE APPEAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN (1991) 38 ITD 320. 03. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER THE HEARIN G, ON 07.08.2012. SD/- SD/- (N. V. VASUDEVAN) (N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT