SYNECHRON TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD, Pune V. ACIT, Pune

ITA 1496/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5277 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MODI
• Section: 92C; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1496/PN/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) SYNECHRON TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., SYNECHRON IT TOWERS, MIDC KNOWLEDGE PARK, KHARADI, PUNE 411 014. PAN : AAICS2894R . APPELLANT VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6, PUNE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MR. A. K. MODI DATE OF HEARING : 14-10-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14-10-2013 ORDER PER G. S. PANNU, AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, PUNE DATE D 31.05.2011 WHICH, IN TURN, HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER DATED 08.12.2009 PAS SED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 92C A(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), PERTAINING TO THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. IN THIS CASE, INITIALLY THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED FI XING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 14.10.2013. HOWEVER, ON 14.10.2013 NEITH ER ASSESSEE ATTENDED NOR THERE WAS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESS EE DOES NOT WANT ITA NO.1496/PN/2012 A.Y. 2006-07 TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION, AS HELD BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF IN DIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DO WN BY THE HONBLE COURTS AND ALSO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBU NAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 AND THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR 223 ITR 480 (MP), WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION WITH LIBERTY TO MOVE APPLICATION FOR RECALLING OF THE OR DER AFTER SHOWING THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING IN TERMS OF RULE 24 O F THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED, AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AT THE CONCLUSION OF TH E HEARING ON 14 TH OCTOBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (R.S. PADVEKAR) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 14 TH OCTOBER, 2013 SUJEET COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-III, PUNE; 4) THE CIT-III, PUNE; 5) THE DR, B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., PUNE.