S.Sundararaman, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 2437/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8917 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N MADHAVAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH(SMC), CHENNAI , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . /ITA NOS. 2436 & 2437/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2007-08 SHRI S. SUNDARARAMAN, C/O K.S.LAKSHMI NARAYANAN,FCA HARI & NARAYANAN, CAS, 1 ST FLOOR, FLAT NO.D, 52, ABBUSALI STREET, SALIGRAMAM, CHENNAI 600 092. PAN AAIPS8174P ( /APPELLANT) V. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, COMPANY CIRCLE-VI(1), CHENNAI. RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N. MADHAVAN, JCIT ! / DATE OF HEARING : 13.06.2016 '# ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.07.2016 / O R D E R THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAIN ST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX( APPEALS), DATED 30.6.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AN D 2007- 08. - - ITA 2436 & 2437/14 2 2. FIRSTLY, THE CASES WERE FIXED FOR HEARING ON 1.1 .2015 BUT THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION AND ADJOURNED TO 14.4.20 15. AGAIN ON 14.4.2015, THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED TO 7.7.2015, AS IT WAS A CLOSED HOLIDAY. FURTHER, THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR AND DUE TO NON-FUNCTION OF TH E BENCH. ONCE AGAIN, THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED TO 27.6.2016 AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR VIDE LETTER DATED 4.4.2016. FINALLY, THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED TO 13.6.2016 AND THE NOTICE O F THE HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH REGISTERED POST WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE (RPAD) AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN F ORM NO. 36, BUT THE SAME WAS RETURNED WITH THE REMARK PART Y LEFT AND WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING ON 13.6.2016, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICAT ION FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN RECEIVED. 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL - - ITA 2436 & 2437/14 3 BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. HENCE, FOLLOWING THE DECISIO N OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MULTIPLAN INDIA P. LTD., REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480) , WE DISMISS THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON- PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 6 TH OF JULY, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( $ % & ' ) ()*+,-*.//0*-12 ! 34566/7+8*+89:;<:- $= /CHENNAI, >3 /DATED, THE 6 TH JULY, 2016. MPO* 3? @ABA /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. C2 /CIT(A) 4. C /CIT 5. ADE F /DR 6. EGH /GF.