M/s Best Trade Commodities (P) Ltd., Ludhiana V. ITO, Ludhiana

ITA 131/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 81008 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J S NAGAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 131/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 M/S BEST TRADE COMMODITIES(P) LTD., VS. THE ITO 70, NEW LAJPAT NAGAR WARD VI(I) LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN NO.AACCB7887P ITA NO. 132/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 M/S BEST BUY COMMODITIES(P) LTD., VS. THE ITO 70, NEW LAJPAT NAGAR WARD VI(I) LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN NO.AACCB7846C ITA NO. 133/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 M/S CITY COMMODITIES(P) LTD., VS. THE ITO 518 LSE BUILDING WARD VI(I) FEROZE GANDHI MARKET LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN NO.AACCC3857A ITA NO. 134/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 M/S BIG BULL COMMODITIES (P) LTD. VS. THE ITO 70, NEW LAJPAT NAGAR WARD VI(I) LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN NO.AACCB7845B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. J.S. NAGAR DATE OF HEARING : 17/11/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17/11/2014 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JM ALL THE APPEALS BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A), LUDHIANA DT. 14/11/2013 AND 1 9/11/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY. 2 2. THE RECORD REVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY SEEKING ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTER AND ON THE LAST DATE OF H EARING FIXED ON 30/09/2014, THE APPEALS WERE ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE AS SESSEE FOR 17/11/2014. ON 17/11/2014 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT THEREFORE SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEES ARE NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF THE APPEALS THEREFORE, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE - (I) HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. B.N . BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. (II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. CWT, 223 IT R 480 (MP) IN THIS CASE REFERRING AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ABOVE, DISMIS SED FOR DEFAULT AND FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEPS. (III) CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA(P.) LTD. 38 ITD 320 (D ELHI) DISMISSED THE MATTER BEING NOT PURSUED UNADMITTED. 4. CONSIDERING THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEES IN NOT PURSUING THE APPEALS AND RELYING UPON THE ABOVE JUDGMENTS, WE DISMISSED ALL THE APPEALS OF THE DIFFERENT ASSESSEES AS UNADMITTED. 5. IN THE RESULT ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES A RE DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17/11/2014 SD/- SD/- (T.R. SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 17/11/2014 AG COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT, TH E CIT(A), THE DR