Sri Asesh Kumar Jana, Paschim Medinipur V. ITO, Ward-1(2), Midnapur, Paschim Medinipur

ITA 2095/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1457 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 17-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 17-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KALYAN NATH
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E

Judgement Text

, D , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH: KOLKATA ( ) BEFORE . . , /AND . , ) [BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM] / I.T.A NOS. 2095 & 2096/KOL/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 SHRI ASESH KUMAR JANA (PAN: AELPJ1577Q) VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-1(2), KOLKATA. ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING 04.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15.09.2017 FOR THE APPELLANT/ N O N E FOR THE RESPONDENT/ SHRI KALYAN NATH, ADDL. CIT / ORDER PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM BOTH THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-XXXVI, KOLKATA DATED 30.06.2014 FOR AY 2004-05 PASSED U/S 271(1)(B) AND 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) RESPECTIVELY. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED IN THIS CASE TODAY I.E. ON 04-09-2017, NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR HAS HE FILED ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT DESPITE THE FACT THAT ON EARLIER OCCASION I.E. ON 31.05.2017 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE NOTICES WERE SENT THROUGH RPAD FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 17.07.2017. ON 17.07.2017 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 04.09.2017 AND THE NOTICE FOR FIXING THE HEARING ON 04.09.2017 WAS DISPLAYED ON NOTICE BOARD OF THE TRIBUNAL. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PURSUING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B. N. BHATTACHARJEE & ANR. 118 ITR 461 (SC) OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT AND THE LAW DOES NOT HELP A SLEEPING LITIGANT. HENCE, THE ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS UN-ADMITTED. WE, THEREFORE, RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF ITAT DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL), DISMISS BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-APPEARANCE. 2 ITA NOS.2095 & 2096/KOL/2014 ASESH KUMAR JANA, AY 2004-05 3. WE, FURTHER, MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IF THE ASSESSEE IS ADVISED TO MOVE APPROPRIATE APPLICATION TO RECALL THIS ORDER, THEN HE IS AT LIBERTY TO DO SO FOR JUST CAUSE AND THE TRIBUNAL MAY DECIDE IN ACCORDANCE TO LAW. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15/09/2017. SD/ SD/- (ABY. T. VARKEY) (DR. A. L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15/09/2017 RS (S.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT SHRI ASESH KUMAR JANA, C/O SHRI RATAN KUMAR GUHA, ADVOCATE, KHUDIRAM NAGAR, PASCHIM MIDNAPORE, PIN-721 101 2 RESPONDENT ITO, WARD-1(2), KOLKATA. 3 . THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. CIT , KOLKATA DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O, I.T.A.T, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA .