Rafique - Ul - Islam, North 24 Parganas V. I.T.O. Wd-50(1),Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1760/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4588 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 12-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DINABANDHU NASKAR JCIT SRDR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1760 / KOL / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2005-06 RAFIQUE UL ISLAM AWALSIDDHI CHOWMATHA, 24 PARGANAS (N), PIN -743 221 [ PAN NO. AAGPI 7867 P ] V/S . ITO, WARD-50(1), BLOCK DS 2 & 3; MNIKTALA CIVIK; UTTARAPAN, KOLKATA 700 054 . /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT NONE /BY RESPONDENT SHRI DINABANDHU NASKAR, JCIT-SR-DR /DATE OF HEARING 12-07-2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12-07-2016 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXXII, KOLKATA DATED 12.03.2013. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ITO WARD-50(1), KOLKATA U/ S 143(3)/147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS T HE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 30.09.2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING NEITHER APPEARED NOR FIL ED ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE THOUGH NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITA NO.1760/KOL/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 RAFIQUE UL ISLAM V. ITO WD-50(1) KOL. PAGE 2 THE APPEAL. IN VIEW OF THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (I) LTD. , REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL.), HONBLE MP HIGH COUR T IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 AND HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT 296 ITR 495 (P & H) AND THE HONBLE SUPRME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N.BHATTACHARJEE & ANOTHER 296 ITR 495 (SC), LAYING DOWN PROPOSITION THAT A L ITIGANT HAS NOT ONLY TO FILE AN APPEAL BUT HAS TO PROSECUTE THE SAME DI LIGENTLY AND ON FAILURE TO SO PROSECUTE THE APPEAL CAN BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSE CUTION, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LI MINE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 12/ 07/2016 SD/- SD/- ( !') (!') (N.V.VASUDEVAN) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP $!% &- 12 / 07 /201 6 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-RAFIQUE UL ISLAM, AWALSIDDHI CHOWMATHA, 24 PARGAN (NORTH) PIN 743 221 2. /RESPONDENT-ITO WD-50(1), BLOCK DS2 & 3, MANIKTALA CIVIK, UTTARAPAN, KOL-54 3.%.%/01 1 2 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 1 1 2- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5.567 /0, 1 /0 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6.7:;<= / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ 1!, /TRUE COPY/ / % 1 /0 ,