Mehul Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata V. I.T.O., Ward-12(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1913/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1795 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOULEN HANGSHING

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1913 / KOL / 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009-10 MEHUL OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., 61B, SOUTH END PARK, KOLKATA-700029 [ PAN NO.AACCM 3141 K ] V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-12(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KOLKATA-69 /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT NONE /BY RESPONDENT SHRI GOULEN HANGSHING, CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 24-04-2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03-05-2017 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXX, KOLKATA DATED 25.08.2014 WHICH PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING NO ON E APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS F ILED, THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE NOTICE OF HEARI NG WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD AT THE ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN CO LUMN 10 OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL IN FORM NO. 36, FIXING THE HEARING ON 24.04.2017 (T ODAY). FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PUR SUING ITS CASE. 3. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND KEEPING I N VIEW THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES AS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF ITA NO.1913/KOL/2014 A.Y. 2009-10 MEHUL OVERSEAS PVT. LTD. VS. ITO WD-12(2) KOL. PAGE 2 CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., (38 ITD 320)(DEL), TH E ASSESSEES APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480) HAS HELD AS UNDER: ' IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MA DE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION O F THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT B OUND TO ANSWER THE REFERENCE. ' 5. SIMILARLY, HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NEW DIWAN OIL MILLS VS. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495) RETURNED THE REFE RENCE AN ANSWERED SINCE THE ASSESSEE REMAINED ABSENT AND THERE WAS NOT ANY ASSI STANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE. 6. THEIR LORDSHIPS OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. BHATTACHARGEE & ANOTHER (118 ITR 461 AT PAGE 477-47 8) HELD THAT THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN, MERE FILING OF THE MEMO OF APPEAL BUT EFF ECTIVELY PURSUING THE SAME. 7. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE CA SES CITED SUPRA, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. BEFORE PARTING, WE ADD THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED, T HEN IT WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PRAY FOR A RECALL OF THIS ORDER BY MOVING AN APPROPRIATE PET ITION, AS PER LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 03 /05/2017 SD/- SD/- ( !') ( !') (N.V.VASUDEVAN) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP, SR.P.S $!% &- 03 / 05 /201 7 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-MEHUL OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., 61B, SOUTH END PARK, KOLKATA-29 2. /RESPONDENT-INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-12(2), AAYAKAR B HAWAN, KOLKATA-69 3. %.%/0 1 1 2 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 1 1 2- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5. 567 /0, 1 /0 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 7:; <= / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ 1! , /TRUE COPY/ / % 1 /0 ,