Smt. Daxaben Rajendrabhai Patel, Baroda V. The Dy.CIT, Circle- 5, Baroda

ITA 2184/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6871 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-07-2019
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 30-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K DEV
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2184/AHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SMT. DAXABEN RAJENDRABHAI PATEL, B/84, BALAJI NAGAR SOCIETY, VIP ROAD, KARELIBAUG, VADODARA 390 018. VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 5, AAYKAR BHAVAN, RACECOURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA 390 007. [PAN NO. ADHPP 5909 R] ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : --NONE-- RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. K. DEV, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING 25/07/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30/07/2019 O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2011 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- V, BARODA ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 10.12.2010 PASSED BY THE ACIT, CIRCLE 5, BA RODA UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS TO T HE ACT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE B Y REGISTERED POST AS PER THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN COLUMN NO.10 OF FORM NO. 36. HOWEV ER, AT THE TIME OF HEARING NEITHER ANYBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. FROM THIS, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS NOT SERIOUS TO PURSUE HER - 2 - ITA NO.2184/AHD/2014 SMT DAXABEN RAJENDRABHAI PATEL VS. DCIT A.Y. 2008-09 CASE. HONBLE 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. HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LA TE 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 BE NCH IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, ARE INCLINE D TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO APPLY FOR THE RECALL OF THE ORDER WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME AFTER FURNISHI NG THE SUITABLE REASONS FOR NON- APPEARANCE. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN C OURT ON 30 / 0 7 /201 9 SD/- SD/- ( WASEEM AHMED ) ( MS. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 30/07/2019 PRITI YADAV, SR.PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. () / THE CIT(A)-V, BARODA. 5. , ! ' , #$%% / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. &' () / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !, #$ / ITAT, AHMEDABAD