Sri M.S. Raju, Hyderabad V. DCIT, Circle -15(1), TDS, Hyderabad

ITA 1521/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6343 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 12-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: U MINICHANDRAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. ASST. YEAR APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1521/HYD/13 2007 - 08 SRI M.S. RAJU, HYDERABAD [PAN: HYDS05606G] DCIT, CIRCLE-15(1), TDS, HYDERABAD 1522/HYD/13 2008 - 09 1523/HYD/13 2009 - 10 FOR ASSESSEE : NONE FOR REVENUE : SMT. U. MINICHANDRAN, DR DATE OF HEARING : 10-08-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10-08-2016 O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. : THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, HYDE RABAD, DATED 21-08-2013 ON THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF DEMAND U/S. 201(1 ) AND INTEREST U/S. 201(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT [ACT] FOR THE DEF AULT IN MAKING/REMITTING THE TDS AMOUNTS. THE LD. CIT(A) FOL LOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HI NDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGE LTD., [293 ITR 226] HELD THAT EVEN THOUGH IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEDUCTOR TO SATISFY THE ASSES SING OFFICER (AO) THAT THE TAXES HAVE BEEN PAID BY THE DEDUCTEES, NO INFORMATION WAS FURNISHED AND IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE DEDUCTOR HAS FAILED TO DISCHARGE THIS STATUTORY OBLIGATION AND AL SO HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY PROOF TO THE EFFECT THAT THE DEDUCTEES HAVE ADMITTED THE INCOME AND PAID THE TAXES THEREON. FURTHER, RELYING ON THE SRI M.S. RAJU :- 2 -: VERY SAME JUDGMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT, CIT(A) WAS OF THE OPINION THAT INTEREST U/S. 201(1A) HAS TO BE PAID EVEN IF THE DEDUCTEE HAS OFFERED THE INCOME. 2. ON THESE ORDERS, ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THE PRESEN T APPEALS AND HAS SPECIFIED IN COLUMN 10 OF THE APPEAL MEMO TO WHICH NOTICES MAY BE SENT BEING THAT OF THE ADVOCATES ON RECO RD. NUMBER OF TIMES, THE CASE WAS POSTED FROM 19-03-2014 ONWARDS FOR ABOUT 12 TIMES. THE CASE WAS BEING ADJOURNED AS THE COUNSEL ON RECORD WAS SEEKING ADJOURNMENT FOR FURNISHING REQUIRED INFO RMATION. CONSIDERING THAT NO INFORMATION WAS FURNISHED BEFORE THE CIT(A), ON THE REQUEST OF THE COUNSEL ON THE RECORD, THE CASE WA S BEING ADJOURNED REPEATEDLY, GIVING ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE NECESSARY INFORMATION IF ANY, FOR DECIDI NG THE APPEAL. HOWEVER, WHEN THE CASE WAS FINALLY POSTED ON 10-08-20 16, IT WAS NOTICED THAT LD. COUNSEL ON RECORD HAS INTIMATED TO THE A R, ITAT, HYDERABAD VIDE LETTER DT. 02-08-2016 THAT THEY ARE WITH DRAWING THE VAKALATNAMA. THE COPY OF THE LETTER FURNISHED WHICH W AS IN FACT ADDRESSED TO ASSESSEE ALSO BY THE COUNSEL IS AS UNDER : SUB: WITHDRAWING OF OUR VAKALATNAMA IN THE APPE AL PROCEEDINGS OF SRI M.S.RAJU FOR THE AYS.2007-08 TO 2009-10 - REG. REF: ITA.NOS.1521-1523/H/2013, POSTED FOR HEARING ON 10.08.2016, BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT, 'B' BENCH, HYDERABAD. THE ABOVE APPEALS ARE POSTED FOR HEARING ON 10.08.2 016. IN THIS REGARD IT IS SUBMITTED THAT WE ARE UNABLE TO GATHER INFORMATI ON FROM THE ASSESSEE FOR PRESENTING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBU NAL. WE HAVE CALLED FOR THE INFORMATION ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AND FINALLY ON DT.22.07.2016 WE HAVE ADDRESSED LETTER TO THE ASSESSEE STATING ONCE AGAIN THE REQUIREMENT OF THE INFORMATION IN THE PRESENTING THE APPEALS AN D ALSO INFORMED THE ASSESSEE ABOUT THE DATE OF HEARING OF APPEALS I.E., 10.08.2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL. FURTHER WE HAVE ALSO STATED THAT IF HE FAILS TO FURNISH THE SRI M.S. RAJU :- 3 -: INFORMATION, WE WILL BE WITHDRAWING THE VAKALATNAMA IN THE ABOVE REFERRED APPEALS. HOWEVER, TILL TODAY WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY INFORM ATION FROM THE ASSESSEE AND THE LETTER WHICH WAS ALSO SEND IS RETU RNED WITH AN ENDORSEMENT AS 'UNCLAIMED' ON DT.30.07.2016. COPIES OF LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE ASSESSEE AND POSTAGE COVER RETURN 'UNCLAIMED ' IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. IN VIEW OF CONTINUOUS NON-COOPERATION OF THE ASSESS EE IN PRESENTING THE APPEALS, WE ARE HEREWITH WITHDRAWING OUR VAKALATNAM A IN THE ABOVE APPEALS AND REQUEST THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL TO SEND NO TICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE DIRECTLY AND RELIEVE US FROM ANY FURTHER O BLIGATION. THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, SD/- (XXXXXXX) 3. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND A S NOTICED FROM THE APPEAL MEMOS, THE ADDRESS TO THE NOTICES ARE TO SENT IS THE COUNSELS ADDRESS. IN VIEW OF THIS, IT IS FELT THA T NO PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY ADJOURNING THE CASE AS THE COUNSEL ON RECORD HAS WITHDRAWN HIS REPRESENTATION AND HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE BENCH. PERUSING THE DETAILS ON RECORD AND LETTER FRO M THE COUNSEL, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED I N PROSECUTING THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE ITAT. 4. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., [118 ITR 461] THAT APPE AL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSU ING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WAN T TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POWER TO DISMI SS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH C OURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF IND IA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLL OWING THE SRI M.S. RAJU :- 4 -: DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (IN DIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 5. EVEN OTHERWISE, WE HAVE TO APPROVE THE ORDER OF TH E CIT(A) AS NO INFORMATION WAS FURNISHED TO SUPPORT THE CONTENTION S. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY INFORMATION, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) G IVEN ON FACTS AND APPLICABLE LAW HAS TO BE APPROVED. ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND NO MERIT IN ASSESSEES GROUNDS. 6. IN THE RESULTS, ALL THE THREE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE A RE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 10 TH AUGUST, 2016 UPON COMPLETION OF HEARING SD/- SD/- (D. MANMOHAN) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER HYDERABAD, DATED 10 TH AUGUST, 2016 TNMM SRI M.S. RAJU :- 5 -: COPY TO : 1. SRI M.S. RAJU, HYDERABAD. C/O. SRI K. VASANT KUM AR, A.V. RAGHU RAM & P. VINOD, ADVOCATES, FLAT NO. 610, 6 TH FLOOR, BABUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEER BAGH, HYDERABAD. 2. DCIT, CIRCLE-15(1), TDS, HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (APPEALS)-II, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT-TDS, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.