M/s brocade Communications Systems Pvt Ltd , Bangalore V. Deputy Commissioner of Income TAx Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

ITA 2495/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9203 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C H SUNDAR RAO C IT DR I
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT (TP) A NO. 2495 /B/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 13 - 14 M/S. BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., SURVEY NO.34/1, BAGMANE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., SEZ., 4 TH FLOOR, BUILDING AMBER BAGMANE WORLD TECHNOLOGY CENTRE, SEZ, K. R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU-560037. PAN: AACCB4490N VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI . C. H. SUNDAR RAO , CIT - DR - I DATE OF HEARING : 19 . 12 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 . 12 .201 8 O R D E R PER JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE FINAL ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 25.09.2017, PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL 1, BANGALORE (DRP) U/S 144C(5) OF THE ACT DATED 22.8.2017. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2013-14. IT(TP)A NO. 2495/B/2017 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL TODAY I.E., 19.12.2018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN THE NOTICE OF THE APPEAL INTIMATING THE HEARING FOR THIS DATE ISSUED BY RPAD HAS BEEN RETURNED UNSERVED WITH THE COMMENT LEFT. WE ALSO FIND THAT THERE IS NEITHER ANY APPEARANCE NOR ANY COMMUNICATION FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE. 3. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS, WE ARE, THUS, LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO INFER THAT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) AND CONSIDERING THE RATIO OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT AND VARIOUS HONBLE HIGH COURTS IN SUCH A SITUATION; WE TREAT THE APPEAL AS UNADMITTED AND DISMISS THE APPEAL IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION OF THE CASE. THE ASSESSEE IS, HOWEVER, AT LIBERTY TO MOVE THE TRIBUNAL SHOWING OUT SUFFICIENT REASON(S) AND/OR REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THE CASE ON HIS/HER/ITS BEHALF. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.12.2018. SD/- SD/- ( N. V. VASUDEVAN ) ( JASON P. BOAZ ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED: 19 .12.2018 /NS/