Star Electro Mech Industries, Baroda V. The Dy.CIT, Circle-5, Baroda

ITA 2499/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7895 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 09-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 09-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH PATHAK

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2499/AHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) STAR ELECTRO MECH INDUSTRIES 853, GIDEC ESTATE WAGHODIA, DIST.BARODA - 391760 VS. THE DCIT BARODA CIRCLE-5, BARODA [PAN NO.AAJFS 6207 L] ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI OMPRAKASH PATHAK, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 09/07/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11/ 07 /2018 O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-5, BARODA DATED 16.02.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT FIRM HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE PAYMENTS OR INTEREST TO CRED ITORS. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT COGENT EVIDENCES WERE NOT PRODUCED BY THE APPELLANT FIRM AND HENCE THE DISALL OWANCE OF INTEREST PAYMENT OF RS.11,49,644/- WAS CORRECTLY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRM ING THE DISALLOWANCE AMOUNTING TO RS.11,49,644/- DISREGARDING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER S AND THE APPELLATE ORDERS PASSED EARLIER IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT FIRM. - 2 - ITA NO.2499/AHD/2014 STAR ELECTRO MECH INDUSTRIES VS.DCIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 3. IT IS NOTICED THAT WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR H EARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE-APPELLANT DESPITE NOTICE HAVING BEEN SENT BY REGISTERED POST (AD ON RECORD). PREVIOUSLY, ON 11/12/2017 FOR WANT OF TIME HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 28/03/2018 AND FURTHER HEARING ON 07/05/2018 ALSO ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESENT. IT THUS APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PROCEED WITH THE MATT ER. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, 118 ITR 461(SC) OBSERVED THAT PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480(M.P.) DISMISSED THE REFERENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY STEP S. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY I.T.A.T., DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD., 38 ITD 320. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROS ECUTING ITS APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PR OSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 11/ 07 /2018 SD/- SD/- ( WASEEM AHMED ) ( MS. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 11/ 07 /2018 .., . ../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A)-V, BARODA 5. !'# , $ , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. #() *+ / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, ! //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !, / ITAT, AHMEDABAD