Health Care Formulation P. Ltd., Vadodara V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(3), Vadodara

ITA 1244/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6088 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1244/AHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) HEALTH CARE FORMULATION PVT. LTD., C-8, SARDAR ESTATE, AJWA ROAD, VADODARA 390 010. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), VADODARA [ PAN NO. AAACH 4594 D ] ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : --NONE-- RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MUDIT NAGPAL, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING 30/11/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24/01/2019 O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 02.01.2017 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, VADODARA UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF THE ORD ER DATED 24.03.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE B Y REGISTERED POST AS PER THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO. 36. H OWEVER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. FROM THIS, IT IS REASON ABLE TO INFER THAT THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.1244/AHD/2017 HEALTH CARE FORMULATION PVT. LTD. VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2012-13 - 2 - IS NOT SERIOUS TO PURSUE ITS CASE. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT-VS- B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) OBS ERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR-VS-CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) DISMISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECE SSARY STEPS. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY I.T.A.T., DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF MULTI PLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE AS SESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, ARE INCLINE D TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HOWEVER THE AS SESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO APPLY FOR THE RECALL OF THE ORDER WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED T IME AFTER FURNISHING THE SUITABLE REASONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE. HENCE THE APPE AL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 24 / 01 /201 9 SD/- SD/- ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( MS. MADHUMITA ROY ) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 24/01/2019 PRITI YADAV, SR.PS ITA NO.1244/AHD/2017 HEALTH CARE FORMULATION PVT. LTD. VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2012-13 - 3 - / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. () / THE CIT(A)-I, VADODARA. 5. , ! ', #$%% / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. &' () / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER , //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !, #$ / ITAT, AHMEDABAD