Shri Bhupendra C. Shah, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Patan

ITA 1867/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9972 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO . 1867 /AHD/201 3 A SSESSMENT Y EAR: 200 8 - 09 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH, SMC , AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM] I.T.A. NO. 1 867 /AHD/ 20 1 3 ASSESSMENT Y EAR : 200 8 - 09 BHUPENDRA C. SHAH , .... . ...... . ... . APPELLANT C/O. V.P. PATEL & CO., ADV., A/102, AKSHARDHAM TOWER, NEAR UNDERBRIDGE, SHAHIBAUG, AHMEDABAD 4. [ PAN: A ESPS 2844 A ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, PATAN . ... ............ . RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: NONE , FOR THE APPELLANT ANIL KUMAR BHARDWAJ , FOR THE RESPOND ENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 1 7 . 11 .2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 18 .11 .2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) - GANDHINAGAR, AHMEDABAD DATED 0 3 .0 3 . 2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 09 . 2. EARLIER THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 26.07.2016, HOWEVER, ON THAT DATE THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 17.11.2016 ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEARING TODAY I.E. 1 7 .1 1 .2016, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. FROM THIS, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS TO PURSUE ITS CASE. HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HON BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO I.T.A. NO . 1867 /AHD/201 3 A SSESSMENT Y EAR: 200 8 - 09 PAGE 2 OF 2 HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) DISMISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEPS. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY I.T.A.T., DELH I BENCH IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. I , THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APP EAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2016. SD/ - PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: THE 18 T H DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2016. PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD