CHAMANLAL V. AWTANEY, MUMBAI V. DCIT 15(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2008/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 200819914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 29-08-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SU RENDRA KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH C MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY (AM) AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN (JM) ITA NO. 2008/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-07 SHRI CHAMANLAL V. AWTANEY, UNIT NO. 26, AKURLI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AKURLI ROAD, KANDIVALI(E), MUMBAI-400 101 PAN-ADJPA 0657M VS. THE DCIT 15(3), MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR O R D E R PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN (JM) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2009 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-26 FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 7.02.2011 B UT WAS ADJOURNED TO 25.042.2011 AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. AT T HE TIME OF HEARING NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR FILE D ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSES SEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HO N'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHATTACHARGEE & ANR. (118 ITR 4 61 AT PAGES 477/478) THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF M EMO OF APPEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE A SSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO ITA NO. 2008/M/2010 2 PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POW ER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION AS HELD BY THE HONBLE B OMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN EXC ISE APPEAL NO.62 OF 2009. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN TERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED. 3. THE ASSESSEE SHALL, HOWEVER, BE AT LIBERTY TO AP PROACH THE TRIBUNAL FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER, IF PREVENTED BY SUFFIC IENT CAUSE FOR NON- APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STAND DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2011 SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 25 TH APRIL, 2011 RJ COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED 5. THE DR C BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T, MUMBAI ITA NO. 2008/M/2010 3 DATE INITIALS 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON: 25 .0 4. 2011 SR. PS/PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR: 25 .0 4 .2011 ______ SR. PS/PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 8. 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO AR _________ ______ 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER: _________ ______