Super Auto Forge Private Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1536/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8736 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAL

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !'# ! ,% !& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.1535 & 1536/MDS/2016 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/S.SUPER AUTO FORGE PRIVATE LTD., TS/82/2 METTU STREET, GANAPATHY NAGAR, EKKATTUTHANGAL, CHENNAI 600 097. PAN : AABCS0459B V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -15, CHENNAI 600 034. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : NONE -.+,/0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT 1 /2% / DATE OF HEARING : 11.08.2016 3') /2% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.08.2016 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE RESPECTIVE ORDER OF CIT(A) -15, CHENNAI FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEARS 2009- 2 I.T.A. NOS.1535 & 1536/MDS/2016 10 & 2010-11. SINCE COMMON ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDE RATION IN BOTH THE APPEALS, WE HEARD THE SAME TOGETHER AND DISPOSING O FF THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. WHEN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING O N 11.08.2016, NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH THE NO TICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE BY R.P.A.D. THE REGISTRY HAS PLACED ON RECORD THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AS A PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING. 3. THERE MAY BE VARIOUS REASONS FOR THE ASSESSEE FO R NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 11.08.2016 WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. ONE OF THE REASONS, PRESUMABLY, THE ASSESS EE MAY NOT BE INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL IN FURTHER. W HATEVER MAY BE THE REASON, BY KEEPING THE PROVISIONS TO RULE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963, IN MIND, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HOWEVER , IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IT IS OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUN AL FOR RECALL OF THIS ORDER PROVIDED THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE ON THE PART OF T HE ASSESSEE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL ON 11.08.2016 WHEN T HE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. 3 I.T.A. NOS.1535 & 1536/MDS/2016 4. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEALS OF THE A SSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH AUGUST, 2016 AT CHENNAI SD/- SD/- (. !'# ! ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 11 TH AUGUST, 2016. SP. / -267 87)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 92 () /CIT(A) 4. 1 92 /CIT, 5. 7: -2 /DR 6. ;( < /GF.