Intuit Technology services P Ltd, Bangalore V. Commissioner of Income tax(appeals)-IV, Bangalore

ITA 1665/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 166521114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R REDDY CITIDR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A NO. 1665/BANG/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 INTUIT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PVT. LTD., [NOW MERGED WITH INDIA PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CENTRE PVT. LTD.], 7 TH FLOOR, CAMPUS 4A, PRITECH PARK (ECOSPACE), BELLANDUR VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE 560 103. PAN: AABCI 3011M VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IV, BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.R. REDDY, CIT-I(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 03.08.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.08.2015 O R D E R PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER D ATED 2.7.2013 OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-IV, BANGALORE FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2009-10. ITA NO.1665/BANG/2014 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE T IME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON 3.8.2015, DESPITE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CUM -NOTICE DATED 26.12.14 SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE INTIMATING THE DATE OF HEARING. IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ABOVE NOTICE ALSO CONTAINED DEFEC T NOTICE CALLING UPON THE ASSESSEE TO RECTIFY THE SAME, BUT IT APPEARS TH E SAME HAS NOT BEEN RECTIFIED. THUS, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS N OT KEEN IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PR OVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL) , WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UNADMITTED. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER: 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 REFE RENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. 4. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARJEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-478) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE M EMO OF APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. ITA NO.1665/BANG/2014 PAGE 3 OF 3 5. FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE AFORESAID DECISIONS, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HOWEVER, IF THE ASSESSEE THROUGH PROPER APPLICATION CAN SATISFY THE TRIBUNAL FOR SUCH NON- APPEARANCE ON THE APPOINTED DATE, THE TRIBUNAL, AT ITS DISCRETION, MAY RECALL THIS ORDER. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 7 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ) ( N.V. VASU DEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 7 TH AUGUST, 2015. /D S/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENTS 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.