Mahavir Spinning Mills (P) Ltd., Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

ITA 256/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57610 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-04-2013
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAISHREE SHARMACIT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.256 /CHD/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01) MAHAVIR SPINNING MILLS(P)LTD., VS. THE A.C.I.T., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VARDHMAN CIRCLE-1, TEXTILES PROCESSORS(P) LTD.), LUDHIANA. CHANDIGARH ROAD, LUDHIANA. PAN: AAACV5455B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SMT.JAISHREE SHARMA,CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.01.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.01.2012 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J.M. : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, LUDHIANA DA TED 09.02.2010 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 AGAINST THE ORD ER PASSED U/S 143 (3) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FIXED FROM DATE TO DATE AND WAS ADJOURNED TIME AND AGAIN. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 11.10.2012 AND THE SAME WAS ADJOURNED TO 19.01.2012 AT THE REQUEST OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. HOWEV ER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 19.01.2012. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NO T INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARGEE AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGES 477 & 478) WHEREIN T HEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : 2 THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS ALSO :- I) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS (SUPRA), WE DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSEC UTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 20 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (MEHAR SINGH) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 20 TH JANUARY, 2012 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH