M/s Shree Krishna Agro foods P Ltd, Gurgaon V. CIT (A) XI, New Delhi

ITA 1480/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 148020114 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 18-01-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S MOHANTY

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1480/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SHREE KRISHNA AGRO FOODS P. LTD., VS. CIT(A) XI, 2, ARJUN MARG, DLF PHASE-1, NEW DELHI. GURGAON. AAACS9446H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : S. MOHANTY, DR ORDER PER SMT. DIVA SING, J.M. : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 29.01.2010 OF CIT(A)-XI, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO A. Y. 2006-07. CHALLENGING THE ACTION OF CIT(A) IN UPHOLDING THE P ENALTY U/S 271D BY THE AO. NO ONE WAS PRESENT AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE APPEAL WAS PASSED OVER. 2. HOWEVER, EVEN IN THE SECOND ROUND NO ONE WAS PRE SENT NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT HAD BEEN RECEIVED. A PERUS AL OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON 28.09.2010 NO ONE WAS PRESENT AND ON 15.06. 2011 AND 27.10.2011 THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSE SSEE. NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SENT ON 17.11.2011 TO THE ADDRESS INDICATED IN COLUMN NO. 10 OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL FORM NO. 36, WHEREIN T HE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO INDICATE THE ADDRESS AT WHICH NOTICES M AY BE SENT. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPE AL, HENCE, THE APPEAL ITA NO. 1480/D/2010 2 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE UN-ADMITTED/D ISMISSED. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTH ER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LO RDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT: THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APP EAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRO HOLKAR VS . CWT; 223 ITR 480 (M.P) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE IN STANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN T HEIR ORDER: IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPAR ATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. MU LTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.; 38 ITD 320 (DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HE ARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICA TION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATI ON 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 FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UN-ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THESE DECISIONS (SUPRA), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS UN-ADMITTED/DISMISSED FOR NO N PROSECUTION. WE MAY LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SUBSEQUENTLY IF THE ASSESEE MO VES AN APPROPRIATE APPLICATION FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR NON APPEARANCE AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED, THE OR DER MAY BE RECALLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FIELD BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 18.01. 2012. SD/- SD/- (K.D. RANJAN) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 18.1.12 *KAVITA ITA NO. 1480/D/2010 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR