Sri Om Prakash Agarwal, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-35(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2192/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1899 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-12-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT DUTTA CITSR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM] I.T.A NO. 2192/KOL/20 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-1 1 SRI OM PRAKASH AGARWAL -VS.- I.T.O., WAR D-35(1) KOLKATA KOLKATA [PAN : ACOPA 9264 G] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI ABHIJIT DUTTA, ADDL . CITSR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.04.2017. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.04.2017. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.09.2014 OF C.I.T.(A)-XX, KOLKATA RELATING TO A.Y.2010-11. 2. NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 13.04.2017 WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST ON 23.03.2017 TO THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN FORM NO.36. . T HE SAID NOTICE HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. TODAY WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE I S NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THIS APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS L IABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW WE FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHRGEE AND ANOT HER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPE AL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V S CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF TH E ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS M ADE, FAILS TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING, OR FAILS IN TAKING STEPS FOR PREPARATION OF THE PAPER BOOKS SO AS TO ENABLE HEARING OF THE REFERENCE, THE COURT IS NOT BOUND TO ANSWER THE REF ERENCE. 2 ITA NO.2192/KOL/2014 SRI OM PRAKASH AGARWAL A.YR.2010-11 2 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS MUL TIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESEN TED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE W AS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN A BSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE REVENUE AS UN ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . THE ASSESSEE, IF SO DESIRED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANC E ETC. THEN THIS ORDER MAY BE RECALLED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 13.04.2017. SD/- SD/- [DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI] [ N.V.VASUDEVA N ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 13.04.2017. [RG PS] COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI OM PRAKASH AGARWAL, 24, R.N.MUKHERJEE ROAD, 3 RD FLOOR, KOLKATA-700001. 2. I.T.O., WARD-35(1), KOLKATA. 3. CIT(A)-XX, KOLKATA 4. C.I.T.-XII, KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES 3 ITA NO.2192/KOL/2014 SRI OM PRAKASH AGARWAL A.YR.2010-11 3