Shri Satyapal Luthra , Seoni V. Income Tax Officer ward, Seoni

ITA 189/JAB/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8078 (ITAT-JABALPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P D CHOUGALE

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH , JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 188 & 189/JAB/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 SHRI SATYAPAL LUTHRA PROP. M/S LUTHRA MEDICAL STORES NAGAR PALIKA COMPLEX BUDHWARI, SEONI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD SEONI T AN /PAN : (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI P. D. CHOUGALE, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 05 04 201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 04 201 9 O R D E R PER A. D . JAIN, V.P . : TH ESE ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS AGAINST SEPARATE ORDER S PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) - 1, JABALPUR, BOTH DATED 27/6/2018, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11. 2. TH ESE APPEAL S WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 05/4/ 201 9 , BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSE E , NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. ON PERUSAL OF RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE NOTICE S OF HEARING W ERE DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, AS IT WAS ISSUED THROUGH RPAD. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEARING, IT APP EARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEALS . AS SUCH, WE HOLD THAT THE APPEAL S ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. IN THIS REGARD , WE PLACE RELIANCE UPON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: - ITA NO.188 & 189/JAB/2018 PAGE 2 OF 2 1. CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD. , 38 ITD 320 (DEL) 2. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT , 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) 3. NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) , 296 ITR 495 (P& H) 4. CIT VS. B. N. BHATTACHARGEE A ND ANOTHER , 118 ITR 461(SC) 3. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CASES CITED (S UPRA), WE DISMISS THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE MAY, HOWEVER, GET IT REVIVED BY SHOWING SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON - APPEARANCE. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 / 0 4 /201 9 . SD/ - SD/ - [ T. S. KAPOOR ] [ A. D. JAIN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 05 /0 4 / 201 9 JJ: 0504 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR