Maharaja Sivam Industries (P) Limited, Erode V. ACIT Circle 1, Erode

ITA 2609/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5260 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS S VIJAYA PRABHA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU R L REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO. 2 6 09 / CHNY /2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 13 - 1 4 M/S. MAHARAJA SIVAM INDUSTRIES (P) LIMITED, 119, BHAVANI ROAD, ERODE 638 004. [PAN: A A B CM3049D ] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 , SALEM . ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : MRS. S. VIJAYAPRABHA , JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 09 . 0 4 .201 8 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 27 .0 4 .201 8 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT] BY THE ASSIST ANT COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX , ERODE , DATED 26 .0 9 .201 7 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 13 - 1 4 . 2. BY ORDER IN S.P. NO. 319/MDS/2017 DATED 08.12.2017, THE TRIBUNAL GRANTED EARLY HEARING OF THE APPEAL BY FIXING THE HEARING ON 08.02.2018 AND SINCE THE DA TE OF HEARING BEING COMMUNICATED IN THE OPEN COURT, NO FRESH I.T.A. NO . 2 6 09 /CHNY / 1 7 2 NOTICES OF HEARING WAS SENT. SINCE THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION ON 08.02.2018, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 09.04.2018 AND THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ENDORSED IN THE ORDER SHEET BY NOTING THE DA TE OF HEARING. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 09.04.2018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE OR ANY ADJOURNMENT PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IT IS INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE APPEAL. 3. THEREFORE, HAVING REGARD TO RULE 19(2) OF ITAT RULES AND FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. (38 ITD 320) AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJIRA O HOLKAR (223 ITR 480), THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 27 TH APRIL, 201 8 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ) ACCOUNTANT MEM BER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 27 . 0 4 . 201 8 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF .