Kalyan Sen, Durgapur V. ITO, Ward-2(4),Durgapur, Durgapur

ITA 2217/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1861 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BANIBRATA DUTTA A DDL

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. 2217/KOL/20 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-1 0 SRI KALYAN SEN -VS.- I.T.O., WARD-2(4) DURGAPUR. DURGAPUR [PAN : BDAPS 2803 P] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI BANI BRATA DUTTA, A DDL. CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 12.04.2017. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.04.2017. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.10.2014 OF C.I.T.(A)-DURGAPUR RELATING TO A.Y.2009-10. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 12.0 4.2017. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT BY REGISTERED POST TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ADDRESS GIVE N IN FORM NO.36. THE NOTICE SO SENT HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE PRESUMED TO BE DULY SERVED. TODAY WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING NONE APP EARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTIN G THIS APPEAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON P ROSECUTION. 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 : 2 ITA NO.2217/KOL/2014 SHRI KALYAN SEN A.YR.2009-10 2 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. 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 12.04.2017. SD/- SD/- [DR.ARJUN LAL SAINI] [ N.V.VASUDEVA N ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 12.04.2017. [RG PS] COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI KALYAN SEN, 4/18, SUHATTA SHOPPING COMPLEX CITY CENTRE, DURGAPUR-713216. 2. I.T.O., WARD-2(4), DURGAPUR. 3. CIT(A)-DURGAPUR. 4. C.I.T.-DURGAPUR. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES 3 ITA NO.2217/KOL/2014 SHRI KALYAN SEN A.YR.2009-10 3