Shri Pinakin Ishwarlal Panchal, Umbergam V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Vapi

ITA 1912/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9974 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 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: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 08-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO . 1912 /AHD/201 3 A SSESSMENT Y EAR: 200 9 - 10 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH, SMC , AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM] I.T.A. NO. 1912 /AHD/ 20 1 3 ASSESSMENT Y EAR : 200 9 - 10 PINAKIN ISHWARLAL PANCHAL , .... . ...... . ... . APPELLANT AT: DAHELI, TAL: UMBERGAON [ PAN: A JYPP 7231 P ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 2 , VAPI . ... ............ . RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: NONE , FOR THE APPELLANT ANIL KUMAR BHARDWAJ , FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 1 7 . 11 .2016 DATE OF PRONO UNCING 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) - V ALSAD DATED 3 1.03.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 10 . 2. IT IS NOTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEA RING, NONE APPEARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT DESPITE NOTICE HAVING BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SLIP 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, 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 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 I.T.A. NO . 1912 /AHD/201 3 A SSESSMENT Y EAR: 200 9 - 10 PAGE 2 OF 2 IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PRO SECUTING ITS APPEAL. I , THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON - PROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL 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 TH 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