Rich Paints Limited, Baroda V. The Income Tax Officer,Ward-4(2), Baroda

ITA 187/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8712 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 187 /AHD/ 201 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1996 - 97 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR , AM AND MAHAVIR PRASAD , JM] ITA NO. 187 / AHD / 2 0 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996 - 97 RICH PAINTS LIMITED , ....... ...........APPELLANT C/O. SMT. BHARTIBEN M. SHAH, 60, SUNDARAM NAGAR, NEAR JAKAT NAKA, VASNA ROAD, VADODARA (GUJ) 390 007. [P AN : A AACR 8988 H ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4 (2), BARODA. ............................RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: NONE FOR THE APPELLANT AL OK KUMAR FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 2 4.07. 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 17 .08.2017 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR, AM: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 28 TH OCTOBER 2 014 , PASSED BY THE L EARNED CIT(A) - I I I , BARODA , IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 254 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 ( THE ACT HEREINAFTER) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996 - 97 , ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND S : - 1. T HE L D. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF A O IN REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE ACT. THE ENTIRE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THEREFORE INVALID. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - III ( CIT(A ) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ITA NO. 187 /AHD/ 201 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1996 - 97 PAGE 2 OF 3 ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS U/S.68 OF THE ACT TOWARDS SHARE CAPITAL MADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. AS A MATTER OF FACT THERE IS NO CASH WHICH HAS COME TO THE APPELLANT SO AS TO INVOKE THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.68 OF THE A CT, THEREFORE THE APPELLANT HUMBLY PRAYS THAT THE SAID ADDITION BE DELETED. 4. LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAVE ERR ED IN NOT CONSIDERING VARIOUS FACTS, SUBMISSIONS, EXPLANATIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS AS GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE FURTHER ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND LAW IN THEIR PROPER PERSPECTIVE. 2. IT IS NOTICED THAT WHEN T HE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST AS PER THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO.36 WHICH HAS COME BACK UN - SERVED WITH THE POST AL REMARK LEFT . NO INFORMATION REGARDING CHANGE OF ADDRESS IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 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, 1 18 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 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., DELHI 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. WE , THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FO R NON - PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 17 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017. SD/ - SD/ - MAHAVIR PRASAD PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 17 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 ITA NO. 187 /AHD/ 201 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1996 - 97 PAGE 3 OF 3 PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER T RUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD