Nazima Mumtaz, Murshidabad V. ITO, Jangipur, Murshidabad, Murshidabad

ITA 2303/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1562 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S M TAUHEED CIT DR REVENU

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA SMC BENCH, KOLKATA [BEFORE S H RI P.M. JAGTAP , HONBLE A CCOUNTANT M EMBER ] I.T.A. NO. 230 3 / KOL/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 07 - 08 NAZIMA MUMTAZ. .. .. . . ... APPELLANT FULSOHARI RAMANA SEIKHDIGHI DIST - MURSHIDABAD - 742227 - DO [PAN : ALIPM 3246 P ] I.T.O. JANGIPUR MURSHIDABAD ... .. ... RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: NONE , APPEAR ED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SHRI S.M. TAUHEED , ADDL. CIT , DR APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 20 TH , 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUARY 23 RD , 201 8 O R D E R PER P.M. JAGTAP : - THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 12 , KOLKATA , DT. 03 / 0 7 /2017, (HEREINAFTER THE LD. CIT (A)), PASSED U/S 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT ). 2. IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS INITIALLY FIXED FOR HEARING ON 31/01/2008. N ONE, HOWEVER, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE S AID DATE. THE HEARING, THEREFORE, WAS ADJOURNED TO 20/02/2018 WITH A DIRECTION TO THE REGISTRY TO SEND THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN THE APPEAL MEMO. AT THE TIME OF HEARING FIXED ON I.E., 20/02/2018, NONE, HOWEVER, HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED. IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SHE IS NOT SERIOUSLY INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING T HIS APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED FOR NON - PROSECUTION. FOR THIS VIEW , I FIND SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: - 1. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B.N.BHATTACHARJEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 [RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478] WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : 2 I.T.A. NO. 2303/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 08 NAZIMA MUMTAZ THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 2. IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS CWT; 223 ITR 480 (MP) WHILE DISMISSING THE REFERENCE MADE AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT MADE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION IN THEIR ORDER : IF THE PARTY, AT WHOSE INSTANCE THE REFERENCE IS MADE, 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 REFERENCE. 3. IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX VS MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD.: 38 ITD 320(DEL), THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH WAS FIXED FOR HEA RING. BUT ON THE DATE OF HEARING NOBODY REPRESENTED THE REVENUE/APPELLANT NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION OR INFORMATION AS TO WHY THE REVENUE CHOSE TO REMAIN ABSENT ON THAT DATE. THE TRIBUNAL ON THE BASIS OF INHERENT POWERS, TREATED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AS UN ADMITTED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. 3 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . KOLKATA, THE 23 RD DAY OF FEBRUARY , 201 8 . SD/ - [ P.M. JAGTAP] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 23 . 0 2 .201 8 {SC SPS} 3 I.T.A. NO. 2303/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 08 NAZIMA MUMTAZ C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. NAZIMA MUMTAZ FULSOHARI RAMANA SEIKHDIGHI DIST - MURSHIDABAD - 742227 - DO 2. I.T.O. JANGIPUR MURSHIDABAD 3. CIT(A) - 4. CIT - , 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/ D.D.O. ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES