Dream Land Ventures Private Limited , Bangalore V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

ITA 1889/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3194 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 14-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATYA PINISETTY
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 132; 144; 142(1); 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1889/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 M/S. DREAM LAND VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE [PAN: AACCD1047P] VS THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : NONE FOR REVENUE : SHRI SATYA PINISETTY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 22-02-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22-02-2019 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. : THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-12 , HYDERABAD, DATED 26-03-2018 FOR THE AY. 2015-16. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 22-02-2 019, THE NOTICE OF WHICH WAS SENT THROUGH RPAD, NONE APPEARE D ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE NOR THERE WAS ANY REQUEST FOR ADJO URNMENT. EVEN, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECTIFIED THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY THROUGH NOTICE DATED 26/09/2018. AS PER PROCEDURE, THE DEFECTS MUST BE RECTIFIED WITHIN 15 DAYS OF SERVING OF DEFECT MEMO, WHICH WAS SERVED IN THIS CAS E ON I.T.A. NO. 1889/HYD/2018 :- 2 -: 26/09/2018. THEREFORE , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL. 3. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & ANR., [118 ITR 461] THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF AP PEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSE SSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHE RENT POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION AS HEL D BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEM IPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THE REFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., [38 ITD 320] AND MADHYA PRAD ESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR [223 ITR 480], WE DISM ISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. EVEN ON MERITS, THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY, DID NOT FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDE RATION. SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIONS U/S. 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT [ACT] WERE CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ON 23-01 -2015. NOTICE U/S. 142(1) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 19-01-2016 CALLING FOR RETURN OF INCOME AND THE SAME WAS SERVED ON THE AS SESSEE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY RETURN OF INCOM E. SUBSEQUENTLY, IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, NOTICES U/S. 142(1) OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED ON 18-01-2 016 AND 14-10-2016, CALLING FOR THE INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR ASSESSMENT, ALONG WITH ALL THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO COMPLY TO ANY OF THE NOTICES ISSUE D. FINALLY A LETTER WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 15-12-2016 BY TH E I.T.A. NO. 1889/HYD/2018 :- 3 -: ASSESSING OFFICER, DIRECTING THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW CAUS E AS TO WHY ASSESSMENT SHOULD NOT BE COMPLETED U/S. 144 OF THE ACT AS PER THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORD. EVEN TO TH IS SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ALSO, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COMPLY. ASSESS MENT WAS THUS COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 144 ON 30- 12-2016, MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCE S: I. INCOME FROM BUSINESS ESTIMATED @15% OF GROSS RECEIPTS - RS.19,62,61,354 II. INTEREST INCOME - RS. 10,109 --------------------- TOTAL: RS.19,62,71,463 --------------------- 5. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE. 6. SINCE, THERE IS NO REPRESENTATION FROM THE ASSESSEE AND THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) ARE UNCONTROVERTED, WE UPHO LD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND FEBRUARY, 2019 SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIF AUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 22 ND FEBRUARY, 2019 TNMM I.T.A. NO. 1889/HYD/2018 :- 4 -: COPY TO : 1. M/S. DREAM LAND VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, C/O. M.V. PRASAD, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, D.NO. 60-7- 13, 4 TH LINE, SIDDHARTHA NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA. 2. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRC LE-2(4), HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (APPEALS)-12, HYDERABAD. 4. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.