SHARFUDDIN B. SHAIKH, MUMBAI V. ITO 17(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 2452/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 55143 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 07-09-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 29-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARTHASARATHI NAIQ

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. AND SHRI V. DUR GA RAO, J.M. ITA NO. 2452/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 SHARFUDDIN B. SHAIKH, APPELLANT PROP. M/S SHARFUIDDIN & SONS, FLAT NO. 44, B-WING, 4 TH FLOOR, BUSTAN APARTMENTS, BELASSIS ROAD, MUMBAI 400 008. (PAN ABEPS4715M) VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER-17(3)(4), RESPONDENT MUMBAI. APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : MR. PARTHASARATHI NAIQ DATE OF HEARING : 07/09/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-XXVII, MUMBAI, PASSED ON 25/06/2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. IN THIS CASE, SINCE THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION O N THE RESPECTIVE DATES OF HEARING, I.E., ON 03/02/11, 13/04/11, AND 16/06/11 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 07/09/11. ON 07/09/11, NONE A PPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR THERE WAS ANY REQUEST FO R ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE AS SESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING HIS APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN H ELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF B.N. BHTTACHARGEE & AN R., 118 ITR 461 THAT APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN ONLY FILING OF MEMO OF AP PEAL BUT ALSO PURSUING IT EFFECTIVELY. IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESS EE DOES NOT WANT TO ITA NO. 2452/MUM/2010 SHARFUDDIN B. SHAIKH 2 PURSUE THE APPEAL, COURT/TRIBUNAL HAVE INHERENT POW ER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION AS HELD BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF M/S CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA IN E XCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE D ECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., (38 ITD 320) AND MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF P ROSECUTION. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 14 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (V. DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDI CIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 14 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 KV COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) CONCERNED. 4) THE CIT CONCERNED. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, F BENCH, I.T .A.T., MUMBAI. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASST. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T., MUMBAI.