PRIME DECOR LAMINATE SERVICES PVT. LTD., Kolkata V. ITO, WARD - 5(4), KOLKATA , Kolkata

ITA 1653/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1791 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANU BISWAS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & HONBLE SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM] I.T.A NO. 1653/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 PRIME DECOR LAMINATE SERVICES PVT. LTD. -VS- ITO WARD-5(4), KOLKATA [PAN: AADCB 3770 E] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SMT. RANU BISWAS, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 23.08.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.09.2018 ORDER PER M.BALAGANESH, AM 1. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-6, KOLKATA [IN SHORT THE LD CITA] IN APPEAL NO. 238/CIT(A)-6/KOL/15-16 DATED 29.07.2016 PASSED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA [IN SHORT THE LD. AO] UNDER SECTION 143(3)/263/143(3)/147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) DATED 26.03.2014 FOR THE ASST YEAR 2008-09. 2. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND THAT THE DELAY OF 272 DAYS IN FILING OF APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CONDONATION PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WE FIND THAT THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE TO WHOM THE APPEAL PAPERS WERE SENT THROUGH RPAD WAS SUFFERING FROM SERIOUS ILLNESS 2 I.T.A. NO. 1653/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 PRIME DECOR LAMINATE SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND HAD TO FINALLY UNDERGO BRAIN SURGERY. THE SAID AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE AFTER HIS RECOVERY FROM HOSPITALISATION HAD PREPARED THE APPEAL PAPERS AND FILED THE SAME BEFORE US. IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE INCLINED TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL AND HEREBY ADMIT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ADJUDICATION. 3. THIS APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. ON THE DATE OF PREVIOUS HEARING ON 24.07.2018 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 23.08.2018 AND THE NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD. ON 23.08.2018 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND NO ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS FILED. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRJEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION 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 MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT 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 I.T.A. NO. 1653/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 PRIME DECOR LAMINATE SERVICES PVT. LTD. 4. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRES, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER BY EXPLAINING WITH PROPER REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE, THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 05.09.2018 SD/- SD/- [S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI] [ M.BALAGANESH ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 05.09.2018 BISWAJIT, SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. PRIME DECOR LAMINATE SERVICES PVT. LTD., 9,12, LAL BAZAR STREET, 3 RD FLOOR, BLOCK P-B, ROOM NO. 10, KOLKATA 700 001. 2. ITO WARD 5(4), P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA 069. 3..C.I.T.(A)- 4. C.I.T.- KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O., ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES