Snigdha Saha, Hooghly V. ITO, WD-52(3), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 177/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6600 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI S.S.GODARA, JM & SHRI M.BALAG ANESH, AM] I.T.A NO. 177/KOL/201 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-1 2 SNIGDHA SAHA -VS.- I.T.O., WARD-52 (3) KOLKATA KOLKATA [PAN : BIRPS 8259 K] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI S.DASGUPTA, ADDL. C IT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 27.06.2018. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.06.2018. ORDER PER S.S.GODARA, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.11.2015 OF C.I.T.(A)-7, KOLKATA RELATING TO A.Y.2011-12. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON SEVERA L OCCASIONS. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATES AND THEREFORE THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 27.06.2018 NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD TO THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FORM NO.36 AT COL.10. BUT THE NOTICE SENT TO THE ASSESSE E HAD NOT RETURNED UNSERVED. TODAY WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN ADJOURNMENT PETITION WAS MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL. HENCE TH E 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.BHATTACHARGEE AND ANO THER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2 ITA NO.177/KOL/2016 SNIGDHA SAHA A.YR.2011-12 2 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, 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 REF ERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESEN TED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE W AS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE AS UN ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANC E ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 27.06.2018. SD/- SD/- [M.BALAGANESH] [ S .S.GODARA ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICI AL MEMBER DATED : 27.06.2018. [RG SR.PS] COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SNIGDHA SAHA, C/O S.N.GHOSH & ASSOCIATES, ADVOCA TES, SEBEN BROTHERSLODGEP.O. BUROSHIBTALA, P.S.CHINSURAH, DI ST., HOOGHLY, PIN-712105. 2. I.T.O., WARD-52 (3), KOLKATA. 3. CIT(A)-7, KOLKATA 4. C.I.T.-9, KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECR ETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O., ITAT KOLKATA BENCHES 3 ITA NO.177/KOL/2016 SNIGDHA SAHA A.YR.2011-12 3